Talk:EarthLink

message: 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)
replies: text: Seems fairly neutral to me. Master Forcide 03:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, it's reasonably both until there's a separate subcategory for US ISPs... Samaritan 00:42, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Arbitrary section header 

message: 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.  Sparky132 20:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nameservers Trivia 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Removed external links 

message: I think we should split Atria Software into a new article.--Jet123 22:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split Atria Software, LLC

message: *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.  
#CNN referred to Slatkin as "Earthlink co-founder" -- 
#St. Petersburg Times also used the phrase: "Earthlink co-founder" -- 
#The Wall Street Journal used the phrase: "Earthlink Co-Founder" -- 
#The Washington Post, using an article with information from The Associated Press, referred to Reed Slatkin as: "Earthlink Chief" -- 
*Information from these reputable secondary sourced citations, and from the other citations provided at Talk:Reed Slatkin, should and will be utilized to expand upon the article.  Smee 09:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Reed Slatkin 

message: 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)
thread_title: This article sucks

message: This  William Ortiz (talk) 02:56, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  source about earthlink, scientology 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Affiliation with Time Warner Cable? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Apple 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Classic corporate PR advert at this point  

message: 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)
thread_title:  Partial Clean-up 

message: Substituted at 13:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820222333/http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/03/27/slatkin.charges/index.html to http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/03/27/slatkin.charges/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:58, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Needs serious updating