Jump to content

Talk:EarthLink

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:EarthLink/Comments)

Arbitrary section header

[edit]

This article is far from a NPOV, referring to EarthLink as "front group" for Scientology, and referring to Scientology as a "crime syndicate" and using a dubious and quite slanted source as a refererence for this.

This needs to be cleaned up with the slander removed.

This article is does not have a NPOV. It mentions (in a negative light) Scientology more than Earthlink the company. This article needs to be cleaned up. FloBrio 05:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)Flo[reply]

Seems fairly neutral to me. Master Forcide 03:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should this be in the category Internet service providers rather than Internet companies of the United States? Birkett 13:05, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, it's reasonably both until there's a separate subcategory for US ISPs... Samaritan 00:42, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Removed the text about scientology, even though I think it is funny. As a worker for an outsourcing company that worked with Earthlink, I can tell you with no restrictions that Earthlink has nothing to do with scientology. Guy at work 07:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Can anyone tell me the benefits and cons of using Earthlink instead of Mozilla Firefox?

Unless I misunderstood your question, Earthlink is an internet service provider and Mozilla Firefox is an web browser. One is simply a connection to the internet, the other is a tool for exploring the web. BTW, I'm not sure this is the best place to discuss this. This space is for discussion about the article itself, what it should include, what edits need to be made, etc. There are plenty of web sites out there that would better serve your purpose. 4.236.93.79 13:48, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If you install the Windows Earthlink software, it uses a browser customized with Earthlink services. (I think that's what the initial poster was asking.) I believe that this browser is a customized version of Internet Explorer. If you don't like this, you can choose to just not install the software and set up your connection manually. Firefox allows tabbed browsing, which is why I use it more than IE, but a detailed list of differences can be found on the Wikipedia pages. Runa
[edit]
The actual truth is EarthLink provides 'Total Access' which is a toolbar the can be configured to use all your internet related programs. You can choose your browser (Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox) and even your own mail client (Outlook, EarthLink Mailbox, etc). It has more funtions than I care to type and is pretty handy.

The Conspiracy

[edit]

I cleaned up the article and removed much of the speculative talk about scientology and its mafia running EarthLink... mwhahaha! Once we take over the world and enslave the nations of Earth I'll put it back. (couldn't help myself) 03/26/06

Perhaps my humor was misinterpreted, but I have reverted the article to reflect the actual company rather than speculation about the company. I even included a small section devoted to the speculation. I am not affiliated with any organization bent on the take over of the world. Please discuss. 03/27/06 04:30 CST

Nameservers Trivia

[edit]

I'm putting this bit of trivia in here first because I don't know if it's worthy of the proper article. Earthlink's two nameservers are called itchy and scratchy after The Simpsons cartoon characters in The Itchy & Scratchy Show. [1] Sparky132 20:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nameserver problem

[edit]

The article mentions that DNS does not have any features to seperate HTTP from non-HTTP traffic. While generally this is true, DNS does include features to separate mail delivery from everything else, and Earthlinks change would be detrimental if it altered MX records. So, the word IMPOSSIBLE is not true, as I am certain that Earthlink did take effort to ensure that MX records weren't tampered with.

[edit]

Several of the external links do not appear to conform with WP:EL guidelines and were removed. Particularly, links to blogs, forums and discussion groups, as well as links to sites promoting an agenda WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Calltech 12:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Split Atria Software, LLC

[edit]

I think we should split Atria Software into a new article.--Jet123 22:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reed Slatkin

[edit]
  • Reed Slatkin is not mentioned once in this article. This should be added and expanded upon, with some of the (22) citations provided at Talk:Reed Slatkin.
  1. CNN referred to Slatkin as "Earthlink co-founder" -- Staff (March 27, 2002). "Earthlink co-founder charged with fraud, money laundering". CNN. Time Warner.
  2. St. Petersburg Times also used the phrase: "Earthlink co-founder" -- Staff (May 1, 2002). "Business digest". St. Petersburg Times. pp. EARTHLINK CO-FOUNDER ADMITS FRAUD.
  3. The Wall Street Journal used the phrase: "Earthlink Co-Founder" -- Tkacik, Maureen (March 27, 2002). "EarthLink Co-Founder Slatkin Admits to Fraud in Ponzi Scheme". Wall Street Journal.
  4. The Washington Post, using an article with information from The Associated Press, referred to Reed Slatkin as: "Earthlink Chief" -- Staff (June 2, 2001). "Earthlink Chief Signs Agreement". The Washington Post. The Associated Press.
Reed Slatkin is undoubtedly a cofounder of Earthlink. However, is there any evidence Earthlink was involved in criminal enterprise? If there is no evidence, the coverage of it here seems disproportionate. Superm401 - Talk 10:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The short section on Reed Slatkin's criminal activity placed at the end of this article seems unnecessary (his con wasn't an enterprise managed by Earthlink), redundant (all this is covered on Slatkin's article in better detail), and weirdly placed (why does this section close the article?). I think it should be removed.SNDLLN (talk) 18:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article sucks

[edit]

Refers to Earthlink's included anti-virus softwars as a "bogus marketing ploy" that's pretty harsh especially with no source.

Further down in the article it says "In 2007 they fired half their staff and the customer service sucks now" or something like that. Again, harsh and no sources.

I didn't even get through the whole article because it is so bad. Somebody fix this up please. (I am not a scientologist okay xenu.net) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.74.61 (talk) 01:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

source about earthlink, scientology

[edit]

This [2] William Ortiz (talk) 02:56, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Affiliation with Time Warner Cable?

[edit]

I use EarthLink through Time Warner Cable and wanted to learn more about the two companies' connection. It is my hope that someone with knowledge include this in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.136.243 (talk) 15:24, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apple

[edit]

I find it confusing to see no mentioning of EarthLink's business with Apple (2001 and up). Has this been voted out sometime? I see no reason not to include it. --87.154.238.155 (talk) 12:49, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Classic corporate PR advert at this point

[edit]

This article is so useless as to be a perfect example of the stupidity and uselessness of wikipedias phony and fictional "NPOV" philosophy.

NPOV sure, as long as the corporate hacks know how to tiptoe around it and/or the article jibes with the Wikipedia insiders personal opines then hey sure it's "neutral".

Reads like a cleansed immaculate corporate bio from the EarthLink corp communications department.

BTW I don't hate EarthLink or have any grudge, this just happens to be one if many if not most obviously corporately manipulated articles now that the hacks have figured out how to tiptoe the rules and get a shiny happy PR piece without stepping over the ridiculous fictional "NPOV" line. I learned nothing about EarthLink from this article except that they have good folks on wiki watch at corporate.

Amen to that! 151.200.235.65 (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Partial Clean-up

[edit]

As I found it, mid-August 2014, the article was written in speedy advertising cant, and was obviously unfit for publication in an encyclopedia. I have cleaned it up somewhat, but's it's still pretty much a juvenile PR handout.

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 04:22, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the email account <@earthlink.net> -- while tagged for an individual's personal email account -- was intercepted and replied upon by a member of the law enforcement community with respect to litigation of a possible DEA confidential informant. Therefore, the account(s) is/was used by members of governmental agencies. 70.188.238.218 (talk) 03:51, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:EarthLink/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

*2 images, 9 citations. Article could use expansion, lots more citations could be added and are readily available online... Smee 08:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Last edited at 08:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 13:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on EarthLink. 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) 00:58, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Needs serious updating

[edit]

First of all, the banner on the article says this reads like an advertisement...Very true. I've been with Earthlink as my first and only provider since their beginning in the 90's. I recently got an ambiguous email saying my service would no longer be available (with only 3 weeks notice) as of 9-3-2020, but great news I'm available for hyperlink. As it comes down, no hyperlink or any service available for me in the Denver area.. The line was provided through Centurylink. I am left looking for a new provider. Anyway, I see there haven't been any recent constructive edits for some time. I notice in 2017 they were sold to Windstream for $1.1 billion and then in 2019 resold for only $330 million. The article reads like everything is rosy and wonderful with Earthlink. It would be nice to see current numbers of subscribers, service area, and troubles.Flight Risk (talk) 00:30, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Does anyone know why EarthLink has such little software competence?

I don't. But if anyone does, it would be very useful to include that information in the article.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:EarthLink&oldid=1196298363"