Talk:Classmates.com

message: List of social networking websites is currently an AfD candidate.  You are invited to partake in this discussion. Czj 18:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of social networking websites on AfD 

message: Is there any significance to the man and woman who show up most often in the Classmates.com banner ads? I'm specifically referring to the ads captioned "She married him?!" (some versions add, "They had 7 kids?") It seems that either those two people are incredibly famous or they're the two most abused, random people on the internet.
:I was thinking the same exact thing! Here's an interesting link you might enjoy. --Mentaka 23:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the folks in the ads were employees. The Seattle Times recently ran an article about the "She married him?!" pair. Meonkeys 07:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ClassMates.com Ads 

message: In 2003, Classmates.com entered into a production partnership with Fox/20th Television to create a reality show based in part on reunions fostered via the Classmates.com website.  The show, a daily half hour syndicated property called "Classmates TV" aired on Fox's owned and operated stations throughout the United States.  Classmates TV was cancelled after ninety-five episodes.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottbaillie (talk • contribs) 06:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classmates On Television 

message: I don't think the wording of the following is as accurate as it could/should be--from the article:
"Classmates.com also routinely sends spam e-mails indicating that one of the recipient's classmates is looking for him/her. Frequently this is untrue, and Classmates.com currently faces a lawsuit for this allegedly fraudulent practice.[16]"
I think "allegedly" is more properly applicable to the phrase "frequently this is untrue".  That's the part that is alleged.  If it is untrue, there is no doubt that sending such an email is fraudulent.  Thus, I would reword the 2nd sentence as:
"Allegedly, this is frequently untrue, and Classmates.com currently faces a lawsuit for this fraudulent practice.[16]"
I was going to simply note this, but I've decided to actually make the change on the page.
Rhkramer (talk) 12:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: the use of "allegedly fraudulent" 

message: Several passages in this article read like an advertisement for Classmates.com, especially the Business Model and Ownership sections.  For example, the information in Business Model is only positive, including some awards that seem insignificant, and in Ownership the phrase "Classmates Media operates leading online social networking and loyalty marketing services" is biased - how do we define 'leading'?
The second sentence in the introduction also has a promotional tone ("The social media website helps members find, connect and keep in touch with friends and acquaintances from throughout their lives — including kindergarten, primary school, high school, college, work and the United States military.").  72.43.171.39 (talk) 16:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this comment. Therefore I've completely revised the page for NPOV. I've also updated a lot of the very old information and added recent news about the NY Atty General's settlements. Londonbroil (talk) 22:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: I had 3 friends in high school,two are now dead. I registered a free account on Classmates and they want me to pay $15 USD(minimum) to find out who the 13 people are who are trying to locate me. I smell a rat.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianAlex (talk • contribs) 15:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Scam 

message: There are no so many popup ads on classmates that you can not get rid of until it makes it almost imposible to scroll through the pages, I will not be renewing my membership after this year.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.227.18.116 (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popup Ads on Classmates 

message: Hello. I think that enough discussion has happened (and flags are in place) to warrant a proper check. To me this page lacks neutrality and reads like an advertisement for Classmates.com. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_viewAnneaholaward (talk) 23:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV check 

message: I think it makes sense to remove the "business model" section all together and replace it with a "history" section like all of the other articles in the social media series.
Anyone agree? A. Ward (talk) 18:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Since nobody objects I will go ahead and make this change... A. Ward (talk) 01:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Business Model section 

message: Hello.
I have copyedited the page for better readability and more accurate meaning of wording, but just noticed two sections with potentially conflicting information already on the page (from before I edited; I simply divided it for easier readability and then noticed this). One section states that there is *possible* untruth to the e-mails, while one states that there is evidence from a lawsuit settlement that these e-mails indeed were fraudulent. I have hidden the two sections for now. When you have further information, please undo my edit and correct the information. Thank you. 69.155.128.40 (talk) 17:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potentially inconsistent information 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Classmates.com. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.ag.ny.gov/media_center/2010/aug/aug18a_10.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:54, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article is badly out of date, but I don't have the time or the stomach to fix it. The Memory Lane branding and style are gone. The aggressive emails remain, along with I don't know what else. I don't know whether the remodel includes a change of ownership, but that certainly needs to be checked.--Paleolith (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Browsing archive.org, it appears that the new design was rolled in gradually, but the Memory Lane part was gone by the second week of March, 2013.--Paleolith (talk) 21:15, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  badly out of date 

message: The yearbooks that can be found on classmates.com from before 1964 can be used to illustrate Wikipedia articles because under American copyright law they're public domain. I've written a bookmarklet that makes it easier to copy the high resolution sheet that you need to click after selecting a photo:
javascript:(function(){$('.extracted-image').html('<img src="'+$('.extracted-image').css('background-image').replace(/^.+?(http.+?\.jpg).+/,'$1')+'" width="400"/>');})();
I hope others find this useful--1Veertje (talk) 13:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  yearbook photos 

message: This article is very confusing to read espeically for the "illegal practices". Shouldn't this be under "controversies"? Also appears to be a personal entry rather than an unbiased standpoint.
Vibrioidxire (talk) 01:08, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hard to read