Talk:AT&T Mobility/Archive 1

message: Hi there. I am trying to add Cingular's job site link to this page. The URL is - http://cingular.jobs2web.com/
This is in fact Cingular's SEO friendly career website. You can verify this with anyone at the Cingular corporate office.
We create SEO friendly job sites for large companies that may not otherwise get organic visibility due to their ATS systems.
The link was deleted due to the fact  "I was advertising"
That is not the case. I do see this as a relvant link to add to Cingulars company page. I am not doing this for ranking value, we already get good rankings. I am trying to add this purely because it makes sense. I have successfully adding career website links to other company pages.
Thank you
: Just because a link relates in some way to Cingular does not make it relevant to the article. A quick Google of "Cingular" will give you some idea of how disastrous the approach of "Has something related to Cingular, include it" would be. It's also obvious from what you've written above that you are employed by the organization that benefits from this link being widely publicized.
: Please don't add it to this page. If someone wants to find out about career opportunities at Cingular, they're better off visiting  and following the links from there. It's not as if Cingular's home page doesn't have a "Careers" link in plain view. --Squiggleslash 14:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, I agree. Tngu77 20:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding an External Link 

message: AT&T Mobility is the official name for the wireless division of AT&T, even though it isn't used in advertising.  How about using this for the name of the article?  2/1/07 4pm
Since it appears that Cingular will not be come "AT&T Wireless", but "AT&T", what shall we call the article this born?  AT&T (Cellular)? Donovan Ravenhull 15:53, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the future, perhaps -- but it's still legally Cingular, and AT&T and Cingular both continue to use that name in press releases, on the web, and in the course of business. It's not time to change the name yet — even AT&T refers to the phaseout of the Cingular brand in the future tense. See my comments here for more. —GGreeneVa 20:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that.  Looks like AT&T is trying not to use the old "AT&T Wireless" name in order to avoid confusion.  Until they finalize the name change (if any), the article should stay as is. The "doing business as" link is good enough for now.--Janus657 16:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What shall we call the new article? 

message: The USA Today article  says they "plan to drop" the name in favor of branding under AT&T, and they "might" still use the Cingular name in "some" markets.
In the Red Herring article , the Bellsouth spokesperson states that the rules of the joint venture allow either them or SBC/AT&T to sell under another name, and that "They are going to resell their Cingular service under the AT&T name, and I think this will be among their large business customers.” It also notes that the USA Today article does not state the nature of the new rebranding - whether it will be simply AT&T or AT&T Cingular.
Also: a Wireless Week article , in which Cingular states that "Mr. Whitacre's comments changes in no way how we will market Cingular. Our size and national presence is an advantage for our parents."
Per the current edit: I don't understand what is meant by "the joint venture would continue to operate as Cingular Wireless". The only evidence that warrants this statement is: the comment by Bellsouth, which has been made in the short time after Whitacre dropped the bombshell and is part of a sentence the second half of which is clearly speculative; and the comment by Cingular which is simply ambiguous. It may be true that the joint venture will continue to be called Cingular Wireless, it may even be likely, but there is no reason to say it outright until all parties involved make a point of saying it, and do so unambiguously. And if Whitacre is saying he wants to "drop" the Cingular name, it doesn't make sense to say he wants to market the service as AT&T in "many" markets.
I am changing the piece based on these reasons.
Well, AT&T is currently in the process of buying BellSouth. Both companies co-own Cingular, but once the AT&T acquisition of BellSouth is complete by the end of this year, then the brand names and logos of Cingular and BellSouth will be phased out and replaced with AT&T's. So the Cingular brand name and logo will revert to the old and familiar AT&T Wireless brand name, but with the use of the new AT&T logo. Don-Don 14:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  AT&T Rebranding 

message: Yes, there is still cusotmer care operations still in India, from the purchace of the former AT&T Wireless. I work for Cingular, I know. --Romeo Bravo =/\= 00:01, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overseas Customer Care 

message: From Cingular: [After a bidding war with Britain's Vodafone PLC, Cingular announced in February, 2004 that they would purchase AT&T Wireless for 41 Billion dollars. The merger was completed on October 16, 2004. The combined company had a customer base of 46 million people which placed Cingular as the largest wireless provider in the United States.]
From Verizon Wireless: [Verizon Wireless, headquartered in Bedminster, New Jersey, owns and operates the second-largest wireless telecommunications network in the United States. As of January 2006, the company served a total of 51.3 million customers ]
I am going to edit Cingular to remove what I precieve as an inaccuracy unless someone can explain that it is not.
199.201.168.100 15:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now we are at 54. something, which is more than Vz Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 20:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cingular vs Verizon

message: has twice now (1st and 2nd) removed information from the article, claiming that the Boston Globe and the New York Times sources provided for the information are "opinionated, not factual" since they have reported on Cingular's advertising without filing a lawsuit.  Does anyone else have a problem with the paragraph removed in the second diff provided above?  -- Jonel | Speak 14:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of information

message: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is meant to define with the use of helpful fact a person, place, product, thing, etc. Jonel has twice now posted an article in relation to the "Allover Network" attacking Cingular's advertising and using opinionated articles from the New York Times and Boston Globe which are highly controversial in their own opinions to attack this advertising.
The motive for his postings are highly dubious. But the black and white fact is that the source that Cingular uses in their advertisement has in fact not filed any lawsuit against Cingular for citing them. In addition, the source (Telephia) freely sells this information to anyone. This was communicated to him politely during initial editing.
Jonel chose to be rude, and attack my handle and repost the information. Thats his choice. But I will not accept him posting and editing sections based on his own personal likes and bias. If Jonel really has a problem with Cingular Wireless it is feesible he simply starts a "controversey" section rather then edit sections to his own vision.
It is not neutral or objective otherwise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cingular hitman (talk • contribs).
: Having your first edit being a removal of information, marked minor and with an edit summary accusing me of acting "in a slanderous manner" () is hardly "polite".  If you can find a source supporting the claims in Cingular's advertising, please feel free to add it.  I would do it myself, but I am unable to find such a source, as the company that Cingular cites in the ads is less than vocal in their support of Cingular's characterisation of their research.  My bias (which you accused me of in your second edit  or motive or lack thereof is immaterial—not one but two major newspapers have written about the advertising.  Asserting that the newspaper articles are "controversial" is hardly reason to delete all mention of them, it is reason to provide reliable sources that contradict them, if any can be found.
: As for the location of the paragraph, the "Allover Network" section is about the advertising and is the most appropriate place to put information about the advertising.
: Your username hardly suggests neutrality nor objectivity, and neither do your actions to this point. -- Jonel | Speak 21:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: I removed this, since it mars an otherwise very nice article. If someone wants to expand on this and re-add it, please do.
==Push to Talk==
Now Cingular wireless has joined to PTT market offering PTT service through with Kodiak network technology. They currently offer 3 Phones in PTT.
-- Taral 19:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section removed 

message: I would like this to be directed to the annoymous poster. 
I think I know ALOT more than you would ever know since I work for Verizon. I roam on Cingular's towers every day Analog with my TRIMODE PHONE. If you need help resolving your problem of uneducatedness, CALL VERIZON! 
Actualy if you know how to read then read this PRL, the latest update. Here are the cold hard facts.
  00075  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA051A  Jacksonville, FL
         CMA364A  Florida 5 - Putnam
  00037  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA012A  Miami, FL
         CMA072A  West Palm Beach, FL
         CMA208A  Fort Pierce, FL
         CMA361A  Florida 2 - Glades
  00175  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA022A  Tampa, FL
         CMA060A  Orlando, FL
         CMA114A  Lakeland, FL
         CMA137A  Melbourne, FL
         CMA167A  Sarasota, FL
         CMA211A  Bradenton, FL
         CMA245A  Ocala, FL
         CMA363A  Florida 4 - Citrus
  00325  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA146A  Daytona Beach, FL
  00229  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA100A  Shreveport, LA
         CMA206A  Longview-Marshall, TX
         CMA240A  Texarkana, TX-AR
         CMA454A  Louisiana 1 - Claiborne
         CMA456A  Louisiana 3 - De Soto
  01729  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA112A  Corpus Christi, TX
         CMA281A  Laredo, TX
         CMA300A  Victoria, TX
         CMA669A  Texas 18 - Edwards
         CMA670A  Texas 19 - Atascosa
         CMA671A  Texas 20 - Wilson
  00587  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA194A  Waco, TX
  00409  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA160A  Killeen, TX
  01711  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA662A  Texas 11 - Cherokee
  00579  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA237A  Tyler, TX
  00033  D/A  FRM Alltel Communications
         CMA292A  Sherman-Denison, TX
         CMA657A  Texas 6 - Jack
  00033  D/A  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA009A  Dallas-Forth Worth, TX
  00033  D/A  FRM VIVO (Brazil)
  00151  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA033A  San Antonio, TX
  00107  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA075A  Austin, TX
  00595  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (blue)
         CMA233A  Wichita Falls, TX
  00164  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (orange)
         CMA075B  Austin, TX
         CMA300B  Victoria, TX
         CMA667B  Texas 16 - Burleson
  00164  (A)  FRM La Ward Cellular
         CMA671B  Texas 20 - Wilson
  00038  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (orange)
         CMA009B  Dallas-Forth Worth, TX
         CMA292B  Sherman-Denison, TX
         CMA657B  Texas 6 - Jack
         CMA658B  Texas 7 - Fannin
         CMA660B  Texas 9 - Runnels
         CMA661B  Texas 10 - Navarro
  00098  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (orange)
         CMA041B  Birmingham, AL
         CMA222B  Tuscaloosa, AL
         CMA249B  Anniston, AL
         CMA272B  Gadsden, AL
         CMA307B  Alabama 1 - Franklin
         CMA309B  Alabama 3 - Lamar
         CMA311B  Alabama 5 - Cleburne
  00122  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (orange)
         CMA033B  San Antonio, TX
         CMA669B  Texas 18 - Edwards
         CMA670B  Texas 19 - Atascosa
         CMA671B  Texas 20 - Wilson
  00035  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (orange)
         CMA010A  Houston, TX
         CMA170A  Galveston, TX
         CMA287A  Bryan, TX
         CMA668A  Texas 17 - Newton
         CMA672A  Texas 21 - Chambers
  00184  (A)  FRM Cingular Wireless (orange)
         CMA112B  Corpus Christi, TX
         CMA670B  Texas 19 - Atascosa
         CMA671B  Texas 20 - Wilson
Taken from http://www.mountainwireless.com/prl/50510.htm
This is just a clip, there are ALOT more places where Verizon ROAMS on CINGULAR Locust43 01:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then why does Cingular still have the AMPS (analog) network?  Verizon Wireless is not the only one feeding on Cingular's AMPS network.  Alltel, Sprint, and other CDMA carriers sometimes feed on Cingular AMPS network.  (Usually in the Gulf Coast area, since Cingular is the "strong" licensee in this area (especially Louisiana, Mississippi, and parts of Texas.) By the way, when it comes to GSM, I prefer T-Mobile over Cingular because they can handle GSM in a better fashion than Cingular.  (Yes, I know that T-Mo is behind Cingular in the latest network technology. i.e., HSDPA —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tngu77 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Fairness, guys.  Verizon Wireless is easy to pick on.  Tngu77 03:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Guys why all the fuss about roaming in a dead technology? I work for an Irish wireless carrier and though we never used an analogue network (opting for GSM/EDGE/3G(HSDPA) over analogue and CDMA, other competitors in Ireland who did, shut down the analogue network years ago. The only issue being, what incentives to offer analogue customers to make the transition over to the digital technology, whether that be the international GSM/UMTS route, or the American CDMA 1xEV-DO option. --  RÓNÁN   "Caint / Talk"  04:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Verizon Roaming W/ Cingular

message: The article needs to be completely reorganized. The sections seem to be random. Masterpjz9 21:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: Not to sound cocky, but thanks to my reorgainization and editing, I think we can remove the needs editing template. I'm going to, if you think it still needs it feel free to put it back-- but please tell why you feel thins way, by posting to this. aido2002 21:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major cleanup done

message: I don't think we need the Cingular Competitors section. It's just repetitive with that and the American mobile phone companies template. -- Masterpjz9 17:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cingular Competitors

message: Article mentions an expected sales boost in January 2006.  Can't verify that this happened and it's not really trivia anyway. Deleting it.
Should we also throw in the lawsuit that broke out recently between "the new AT&T" and NASCAR? they wouldent let them change the Cingular logos.
Bubble 94 is bringin' the JE££¥! 23:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: www.cingular.com is not a reliable source for the claim that Cingular has the largest network.  -- Jonel | Speak 02:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Largest network claim

message: mMode needs an article. Mathiastck 22:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Allover does too. Iolakana•T 15:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  mMode needs an article 

message: Is this really needed? Donovan Ravenhull 00:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so.  I've put it here (the following subsection is the exact text I removed), in case someone wants to take a shot at salvaging it. -- Jonel | Speak 04:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Customer Service Departments? 

message: "Since September 12, 2006, Cingular has been selling Motorola SLVR phones in its stores under the claim that they support iTunes. This is in fact false since the SLVR will not support the iTunes 7.0 software."
I'm confued enough by this that I wouldn't know how to fix it.  Does the SLVR work with any version of iTunes?  Does it just not work with that specific version?  Mathiastck 22:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This talk page is really only for discussing the contents of the article, not discussing problems or inaccuracies in Cingular service. Sorry. Alphachimp 05:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Itunes? 

message: MAybe I haven't seen the RIGHT commericals, but since reading the part that says that Cinglar is using the ATT family below their logo about 3 hours ago, I have seen 4 Cingular commercials on TV, but none of them claiming Cingular is part of the ATT family. Amybody else seen them?70.149.191.99 00:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen it in print ads, and on several of the flyers and brochures in some Cingular stores. Kevin 22:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They use the AT&T family tag in AT&T markets, in Bellsouth markets, some things say Bellsouth family.  Since it's market specific, that's why you don't see it in national advertising.  But now that AT&T owns all of it, you'll start seeing more AT&T (or at&t) family stuff... at least until the rebranding.Symm 00:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATT family 

message: I don't think it's quite clear what it means when the article says that there will be no "AT&T WIreless" Does it mean that you can't just get wireless without buying another ATT service? I don't understand it? 68.155.113.202 06:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its more to do with the stores won't be branded at&t wireless, just at&t.  EnsRedShirt 07:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No AT&T Wireless 

message: *I see that BellSouth Mobility redirects here, to Cingular Wireless.  What of the BellSouth Mobility DCS article?  It is currently an orphan page, see: Template:Orphan. --James Kidd (Contr/Email) 19:08, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bellsouth Mobility 

message: Looks as Cingular name is being ditched. Cingular To Change To AT&T--68.180.8.45 01:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I understand, from things such as the Macworld keynote, the Cingular brad is going to be closely tied to AT&T, but not ditched completely. This seems to be a mis-report at Engadget. aido2002 02:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Their television commercials clearly say that they've already become "the new AT&T", and shows the Cingular logo spinning to form the AT&T logo along with the familiar Oasis music. See for yourself: http://youtube.com/watch?v=WFUoEWLZp3Q —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Knicholls (talk • contribs) 09:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've not seen the commercials, maybe they're not playing in my area. But http://www.cingular.com, which is available countrywide, at this time shows no signs of being rebranded. It's not even mentioned here I don't doubt that SBC intends to rebrand the company, but it would be incorrect at this point to suggest the rebranding has begun if the only mention of AT&T is in advertising.  Squiggleslash 12:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

text: This seems to be the trend for many telecom companies.  Last year, Cincinnati Bell dropped the "Cincinnati Bell Wireless" brand and integrated wireless and DSL services under their corporate name and logo. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Janus657 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cingular to renamed to AT&T 

message: The mention of the iPhone in the introductory paragraph seems unnessicary, considering that it's already mentioned in the trivia section.  I'm deleting it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Whursey (talk • contribs) 18:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  iPhone 

message: What steps do we need to take to get this issue resolved? Should I post a set of options, and then, say, people can vote and we'll put in a request to end the "Move" restriction on Tuesday night, or is there an established formal process for this? Is it too soon (I hope not, because I honestly think the current name is absurd, regardless of whether people feel it should be AT&T or Cingular)
My suggestion would be a poll of:
#Keep the current name
#Revert to Cingular Wireless, and then re-lock the page to prevent page moves. Reconsider the issue once AT&T begins phasing out the Cingular brand, as evident from the Cingular website.
#Change to AT&T Mobility, LLC. Ensure article immediately points out that it is about Cingular Wireless in the first sentence, to avoid confusion during the transition.
Pros and cons of each can be argued, I'd say:
#Pro: Requires least amount of effort. Con: Name really doesn't appear to have any basis except being a set of words (that was probably intended to be descriptive) heard in an ad.
#Pro: Probably least controvertial but locking of page against moves may be necessary as so many seem to believe change has already happened.
#Pro: Is legal name of wireless company, per SEC filing. Con: Is not necessarily name division will trade (be marketed as) under and is certainly not in use yet.
Are there other options? (This is not a proposal for a vote, this is a proposal as to what form the vote will take. I suggest posting it Monday unless there are big objections) Squiggleslash 00:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The current site says Cingular all over pretty much every page, including a "(C) Cingular Wireless, LLC" thing at the bottom. The only reference to AT&T on most pages is the "Cingular is the new at&t" rebranding logo at the top. So unless you're saying Cingular has just decided their new name is Cingular... Squiggleslash 13:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto Squiggleslash — the 'Jack' logo and the Cingular name show up everywhere. Unless you suggest changing the name to "The New AT&T" — nothing on the page says "Wireless from AT&T," after all — and ignoring AT&T's statement that the full legal process to effect the name change has not wrapped up (note the copyright info @ the bottom, as Squiggleslash pointed out) — we still need to fix the article, in a great big way. —GGreeneVa 14:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixing the article 

message: Please record your opinion below. Most importantly is what you want the name to be at present and whether to protect it so it's not changed before further discussion. This does not imply the name change is permanent, protection is there to ensure it's changed with consensus. Let's wrap this up at midnight UT (7pm EST) Tuesday January 23rd 2007, as proposed above.
*Revert to Cingular Wireless (WP:COMMONNAME) and protect; we can discuss changing the name to some variant of AT&T when it is more appropriate to do so --Squiggleslash 13:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yipes! Didn't realize the vote was over. That'll teach me to read more carefully. Anyway, the page reverted from Wireless from AT&T to Cingular while I was writing the above comment, so I think for now that's the right move.Cris Varengo 20:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote on fixing article (2007-01-22) 

message: I'll ask the page be switched to Cingular Wireless, and locked, given the vast majority of responses want that. Squiggleslash 01:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote over... 

message: Can some of the article editors please fix all double redirects here. Thanks, Nishkid64 01:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double Redirects 

message: According to celluloco.com  Cingular operates on 850mhz frequency and 1900mhz frequency. Apparently 1900mhz frequency was acquired from the former ATT Wireless. Since 1900mhz is the standard frequency in triband phone, 850mhz is not included in triband phone, this has some major implication, namely to operate on the Cingular network, one shall really buy a quadband phone, otherwise one will only be able to access old ATT towers. Can someone confirm this? Of course, speaking about buying a phone, we are talking about buying unlocked phone from places such Nokia Store.
: Some confusion above:
: - AT&T Wireless had both 850 and 1900 spectrum. Cingular's original components generally did too. AT&TWS was originally a cellular company called McCaw Cellular bought by AT&T in the mid nineties. Cingular was originally a set of cellular companies owned by various Bells. All bid on PCS spectrum when it came out.
: - Triband phones are simply phones supporting three frequencies. Some support 850/1800/1900, some 900/1800/1900, and doubtless there are other combinations. The majority of TB phones sold in the US recently support the former, the majority sold outside the US support the latter. Even T-Mobile USA's "Triband" phones are usually 850/1800/1900, despite not owning any 850MHz spectrum itself (the 850 is purely for domestic roaming.) Squiggleslash 16:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that article discussion pages are not the correct forum to ask for buying or product advice, but are for discussing the article at hand. Please direct such questions to the Reference Desk. Thanks! -Lanoitarus (talk) .:. 05:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really seeing the original question as asking for buying or product advice, so much as confirming details of Cingular's frequencies and the requirements for equipment that would be compatible with it. Squiggleslash 00:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bands 

message: With more than 600 k subscribers Cingular is currently the largest mobile service provider in PR and USVI and has been for several years. Verizon is 2nd with about 510k —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.189.142.239 (talk) 21:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PUERTO RICO 

message: How about calling the article Cingular/Wireless by AT&T until the transition is complete? 71.233.218.227 04:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? It's branded Cingular Wireless today, and eventually it'll change name to at&t. Let's wait until Cingular changes its name, and then change the page to what Cingular decides to call itself. I really don't understand why people are so keen on jumping the gun, let alone making up elaborate names that do not describe Cingular either today or in the future... Squiggleslash 04:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I think the important thing to keep in mind is that a slogan and a name are different. AT&T also refers to itself as "the new AT&T" sometimes, but is technically only AT&T, and I expect that it will eventually drop the "new AT&T" references altogether. I think the "Cingular, now the new AT&T" references are more on par with calling Dominos and the employee saying "It's a great day at Dominos" (not to demean Cingular operators by any means, just to note the similar type of phone answering remarks!).  Charter Communications use to promote itself as "Charter Communications, a Wired World Company" too. When AT&T wants to simply refer to Cingular service, even in "new AT&T" ads, it says "Cingular" or "Cingular Wireless" in the copy primarily (e.g. the AT&T Unity ads) Tim Butler 22:14, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cingular/AT&T 

message: this article focuses on cingular wireless. and the history of it, and then the merger with at&t and currently the name change. since the company is going through some transition back to the at&t name, should we refocus the articles theme; instead the article should focus on the history off at&t wireless and cingular be in the company's history. does any one agree with me? or does anyone think that we should wait until a more official name change, or wait to see if the article undergoes a name change. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.192.201.227 (talk) 18:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there is no need for a "refocus". This article describes the history of the company now known as AT&T Mobility, and the history of that company belongs on this page. AT&T Wireless' history belongs on a separate page, which it has. KansasCity 04:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refocus of Article 

message: The circumstances surrounding the vote about a month or two ago still apply. The company still markets itself as Cingular, and WP:COMMONNAME applies here. Please don't make us go through the process of move protecting this page again. --Squiggleslash 16:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please do not move page 

message: I'm not trying to start a move/don't move debate, but I just saw a banner ad for the SYNC phone, using the AT&T logo, and calling themselves "Wireless by AT&T, formerly Cingular" Kdupuy9 03:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New name 

message: It looks like Verizon is now the largest Mobile provider in the USA according to Informationweek.com?
Article: Verizon Wireless Retakes The Lead In The U.S. Wireless Market
Posted by Stephen Wellman, Apr 5, 2007 02:19 PM
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/04/verizon_wireles_3.html
[SNIP]Verizon Wireless is once again the top U.S. carrier in terms of direct retail subscribers. According to researcher IDC, Verizon jumped back to the number one position in the U.S., edging out AT&T with 56.8 million subscribers compared with AT&T's 56.3 million. Verizon also held the top spot for wireless data revenue and data percentage of average revenue per user.[/SNIP] CaribDigita 05:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cingular/AT&T/AT&T Mobility -- Whatever you are-- Is no longer the largest mobile carrier in the USA? 

message: There is apparently a new logo circulating the internet that, while still using the colour orange, says simply "AT&T" and then, beneath it, "formerly Cingular"--72.86.44.23 20:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NEW LOGO DROPS CINGULAR NAME 

message: Users have vandalized the page ever since the AT&T buyout. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jmoz2989 (talk • contribs).
: Done. The article has been semi-protected for 7 days. In the future, please list pages here and please sign your posts using ~~~~. Cheers. --MZMcBride 01:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  vandalism 

message: I think it should be mentioned within the article that by acquiring CIngular, AT&T again will be selling products and services through retail stores, like they did with their AT&T Phone Center stores in the 80s and 90s. Nate 09:26, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AT&T Phone Centers

message: May 25, 2007 
What is Cingular's new name?
AT&T. Wireless becomes a modifier for the service (like broadband), not the name of a division. (Our legal DBA is AT&T Mobility and is used only when legally required. It is not a name we are promoting.) 
Wireless from AT&T is correct. 
Why haven't you given Cingular a name?
We have. The name is AT&T — one of the most historic, iconic and admired brands in the world, widely recognized for complete communications and entertainment services. 
How should we refer to Cingular? As AT&T wireless? Or AT&T's wireless division? 
Wireless from AT&T. 
When will the Cingular name be dropped completely? 
Because the brand transition is going well and consumer awareness is high, we have moved to 'phase two' of our branding transition plans. 
Transitional elements of both the AT&T and the Cingular brands will continue to be featured, but AT&T will be much more prominent to clearly communicate that AT&T is a leader in wireless. 
Once recognition of AT&T as a wireless carrier is strong, we plan to fully phase out the Cingular brand.
--Donovan Ravenhull 12:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal 'FAQ' on the name