Talk:Gmail

Should Keep The Beta Status

I noticed that the Beta "header" had been removed. I don't think this should be done. Google still classifies Gmail as a Beta. I think we should be following what the developers classify it as, because they obviously know best. Because Google still has it as a Beta product, I added the Beta tag back in.

Thanks, Speedboxer

I agree.--XMBRIAN 04:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, just for the record. --Mambo Jambo 20:08, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

There is beginning to be an edit war on this page. Jammerpunk1089 removed the {{beta software}} tag at the top, which was previously removed, then replaced. Something needs to be done about this. -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  03:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Let's leave it off until it's thoroughly resolved on the discussion page. I contend that the beta notice should not be placed in this article, as the software doesn't meet the specification of the beta notice: it does not change "rapidly," the development is at the speed of ordinary out-of-testing software, and it's just as stable as the non-betas of its competitors. Sean Hayford O'Leary 00:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

i oppose on the beta tag, as it is not actualy fast changing or unstable, as Sean Hayfor pointed out. I don't object to including it in the text tho, I just don't think tag warning readers is warrented. Martijn Hoekstra 02:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I still think that the Beta tag should still be on the article. Compared to other email providers, Gmail's development is quick. Plus, it still has the "Beta" in the Gmail header, so Google still thinks of it as a Beta, and I'm sure they know best about their Product being Beta or not. So, I believe that the Beta tag should be placed on this article. Speedboxer 07:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

What is actually beta about it, is the +talk feature. not the email service itself. Tekjester 10:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that? If you do, IMO it would be conclusive that it is NOT a beta service. Martijn Hoekstra 22:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Chat

In the chat section, it claims to allow up to three chats, when I have had four chats. I changed it, but if anyone feels the need to challenge this claim, I can provide proof.--James Delgado 00:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

.EXE

Does GMail still purge out executables from attachments? // Gargaj 16:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

• Why would you want to send an EXE file uncompressed in the first place? - Sikon 17:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
  • This is a good point. And yes, it still does. You can get around it with moderately savvy recipients by renaming the file to filename.ex_. Then the recipient renames it back to filename.exe. This gets around the ZIP blocking, too. -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  01:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Screenshot

I've recently noticed in my account that there is now an advert for Google Talk in the talk bar (or whatever it's called). Do we need a new screenshot with this in? I would take one, but I have never uploaded an image and am not sure about the copyright status that this would have. 0L1 - User - Talk - Contribs - 19:08 22 2006 (UTC)

• I say no, as I had one of those the other days, and when I clicked on it, it went away, and has been gone since. --XMBRIAN 01:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Security

I heard a rumor that, although the login screen for Gmail is a secure HTTPS connection, the data being sent back and forth by AJAX is unsecured and not sent through this connection. Is this possible/true? — Omegatron 13:54, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe this is true. Gmail sends your login credentials on an SSL connection, then transmits your labels, contacts, emails, and all other data over an unsecured connection. I don't believe it's the only service to do so; Yahoo! Mail doesn't, I believe, have HTTPS:// at the URL's start. However, Gmail incorporates a connection that is encrypted, accessible by changing the URL from http://mail.google.com/mail/ to https://mail.google.com/mail/. It can be encrypted, it just isn't by default. Let's all suggest that as a feature request to Google. Maybe they'll change it. -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  03:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Both your remarks regarding Gmail security are true. I would however like to refer you to the current state of the Security section (1.3) of the original article. It currently reads as though Gmail was all https and toots this as an exclusive feature. As you both know that statement is false. Voyagerfan5761, perhaps you should change the section to read something like your above comment. --NHelke 20:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I have rewritten the first paragraph of the section. I think it does work better, now that you mention it. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 06:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Redundant duplication

The "Google keeps all your emails forevar!" criticism appears at least three separate times in this article alone. They should be combined into one section. There is probably other duplicated content too. — Omegatron 14:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

How to forward a batch of messages from gmail to yahoo email

dsaklad@zurich.csail.mit.edu
What ways can be devised for forwarding a week of received messages from the gmail inbox to yahoo email all at once?...

• Does Yahoo Mail still support checking POP mail from outside providers? I haven't used them in years, but they used to have a Bold textCheck other mail function and I presume they still would. If so, configure Gmail to allow POP access, then have Yahoo Mail download your mail through Gmail's POP server.

Why are "Tips" sites valid External Links on some articles and not others?

This Gmail article listed several sites in an "External sites" section that linked to "Tips" sites that provided tips and additional information about the Gmail. These sites were included for well over a year, and now have been summarily removed. Reasons given include:

"Wikipedia isn't here to provide tips to Gmail users"

and

"Wikipedia is not a list of links. External resource should have and *encyclopedic* value. Links to help page, hints are usually considered not relevant enough."

While I do understand the intent of the removal, I fail to see how listing these sites goes against the guidelines specified in the External links Help page. The links point to Web sites that provide more in-depth information that is not appropriate for inclusion in a Wikipedia article, but expands extensively upon the Wikipedia content.

In fact, the inclusion of Tips sites and similar sites is completely consistent with the content of other "validated" Wikipedia articles, notably Featured Articles that have gone through extensive and rigorous Wikipedia validation. For example:

• In the Featured article about the Canon T90 camera, there is an external link to a Yahoo Group that is listed as "a useful source of T90 and other FD information"
• In the Featured article about OpenBSD there is an external link to "OpenBSD 101", an overview and information site.
• In the Featured article on Windows XP, the first External link listed is for a "Windows XP Tips and Tricks" site.

So what makes the Gmail article so different from other "featured articles" that include similar links, and can these linkes be reverted back in?

Further, as a point of consistency, if some Tips sites are removed, then in fairness, all other Tip site links must be removed. I tend to lean toward the side of "inclusion" instead of "exclusion" where appropriate, so I would encourage that legitimate Tips sites to be listed.

mobile

There is a new j2me client for gmail. http://mobilepit.com/09/j2me-google-talk-for-mobile-phones.html http://code.google.com/p/gtmobile/ Mathiastck 00:31, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

"Beta"

I edit this a long time ago (and it was removed by a guy with no life) because I was talking to one of the guys in Los Angeles who still is working on GMail as of right now and he quoted that GMail will probably not be taken out of beta "for a long time." His explanation was that as GMail adds new things, you can't really expect it to be "final" until it is "finally done." Phpcoder 22:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Reverted deletion of "Dots in usernames" section

Hi, all. I just reverted an edit made early this afternoon by 205.167.120.201 that deleted the information about dots in Gmail usernames. I ran a search of the Gmail Help Center, and this is all correct information, so it should be in the article. Since the dots are a similar feature to "Plus-addressing", which is in the article and was not touched, I put the dots section back. Let me know if I shouldn't have done that. -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  03:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I think we should incorporate the fact that you can add the plus sign (+) and the minus sign (-) to your GMail account and that it would have the same effect as the dots.

--Vvuser 14:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

This definitely belongs in the article. — Omegatron 15:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Competition s/b impact on the community

As a person who was constantly deleting messages from my Yahoo Mail account for fear that my 3 MB would fill and new messages would stop being delivered, the following text seems like it would be more appropriate under a section about Gmail's impact on the webmail community, than it's competition:

"After Gmail's initial announcement and development, many existing web mail services quickly increased their storage capacity. For example, Hotmail went from giving some users 2MB to 25MB (250MB after 30 days, and 2 GB for Hotmail Plus accounts), while Yahoo! Mail went from 4MB to 100MB (and 2 GB for Yahoo! Mail Plus accounts). Yahoo! Mail storage then proceeded to 250MB, and finally, in late April of 2005, to 1GB. These were all seen as moves to stop existing users from switching to Gmail, and to capitalize on the newly rekindled public interest in web mail services. The desire to catch up was especially visible for MSN Hotmail, which upgraded its e-mail storage erratically from 250 MB to the new Windows Live Mail (beta) which includes 2 GB of storage over a number of months. In August of 2005, AOL started providing all AIM screen names with their own e-mail accounts with 2 GB of storage. Another example of competition came from 30Gigs who were offering 30 gigabytes of storage, and was also invite only, but now offers free accounts for anyone." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DigitalEnthusiast (talk • contribs) 01:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

Google Mail

When using Gmail with Hebrew language, the title and logo are also "Google Mail". Should this be noted? Psychomelodic User:Psychomelodic/me 14:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. —Nightstallion (?) 20:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Browser Support

Since November 2006, it became impossible to use GMail in K-Meleon 0.8.2 (using Gecko 1.5) and Mozilla Application Suite 1.4.x, 1.5.x and 1.6.x as they all hanged when trying to access the advanced version of GMail (I tried them all). Browsers with 1.7.x Gecko versions were unaffected (the earliest that I could test was Knoppix 3.6 with Mozilla 1.7.2); assuming that all Gecko 1.7.x versions work with the current incarnation of GMail, this would then also include all versions of Mozilla Firefox 0.9.x and up. This means that software requirements are just a bit more demanding than stated in the current version of the article.
-Mardus 10:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Someone should probably mention that you can't use italics, underlining, etc. in Gmail on the Safari browser. 75.73.164.111 14:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it Mac-Safari or Windows-Safari? -Mardus 12:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

My login is 37report my pass word is dogshit why can't i log in?

POV section template Privacy

I removed the pov-section template as there was no corresponding discussion on the talk page as to what was disputed. If the person(s) who added the template feels the issues persist, please re-add the template and include a discussion on the talk page Zero sharp 00:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Related Products

So far this section is small. I can't see why we need to split it off. - JustinWick 19:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I've now incorporated it into the Features section, and renamed it to Applications. Mambo Jambo 20:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

YTM (You're the man! or woman maybe?) - JustinWick 19:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Merge Features of Gmail

I think Features of Gmail should be merged into the main Gmail article. I don't think there should be a separate article, because Gmail's features are what makes the article. There is some potentially good content to use and make more concise. Besides, there is still a section for Features, and it was never summarises properly, so we may as well bring it back in. Mambo Jambo 00:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

SUPPORT the merge. the features are what makes it gmail. If other things might have to move to keep it from becoming too large, the features should be a key point in the article — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Martijn Hoekstra (talk • contribs) 02:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

Support the merge. Features of Gmail definitely belongs in the Gmail article. -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  02:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

• Support —ScouterSig 03:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The merge is now complete, thanks for the support. Feel free to clean anything up, but it doesn't seem to be too bad. Mambo Jambo 20:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

2.8 Or Not 2.8, That is the Question

Is there any way this be sorted out once and for all? Would it be against style guidelines to say "approximately 2.8GB"? "GiB" is such an unknown term and it's not user-friendly solution - I don't think it should be kept that way. Mambo Jambo 20:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

What about "over 2800 MB, that is slightly less then 2.8 GiB "? It is correct, and clear to me. However, will it be clear to everybody?Martijn Hoekstra 23:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I say that's good, except for a little issue. How about "...over 2,800 MB (slightly less than 2.8 GiB) of..."? -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  00:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Co$t?

How much does a Gmail account cost to use, if anything?--CJ King 03:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• It's free. - Sikon 06:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Criticism

Doesn't the criticism section see a bit biased, at minimal? It seems to not be neutral... anyone else think a good cleanup is in order? P3net 03:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree it's a bit biassed. I also did a bit of a cleaup, but since i am biased too, it's pretty hard. Martijn Hoekstra 21:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Then how should we go about cleaning it? Wait for someone non-biased to come along? Flag it? P3net 03:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

if you're up for the task, be bold, and go for it. Martijn Hoekstra 04:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I flagged it with {{POV-section}} so that others know it's being disputed. I'm going to go through and do my best to make it neutral P3net 04:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I went through and removed some of the stuff, and added a bunch of {{fact}} tags. At the state the section is, though, I think we should just start from the beginning with that section. Anyone else agree? P3net 04:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You amaze me. How can users of a service like Gmail not be biased? Readers of Wikipedia deserve to be given the big picture, i.e., the pros and cons of using Gmail. If this means demonstrating the treatment of users by Gmail [with appropriate citations], then so be it. I don't see where the issue of neutrality comes into play here, as users have right to expect a certain level of service from a major corporation like Google. 194.129.64.62

I doubt P3net is trying to say that there should be no criticism, I know I don't say that. However, the way the criticism was worded was very biased. There is still the issue of structure in the criticism section. I propose to structure it a bit more to split the criticism in a webclient and a service part. Martijn Hoekstra 19:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

That's what I'm trying to say. I agree with your proposal. P3net 00:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

can anyone explain what the "attachment warning" thingy is? Again, a criticism section is needed, but if it can't be explained any further I'm afraid I have to remove it. Martijn Hoekstra 19:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Umm... I don't know. I'd say we remove that part. P3net 00:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I tried to do some pov-cleaning on the "Errors, Design Flaws, and Absent features" but a lot of it seems to be begging the question, i.e. things are just assumed to be errors and design flaws (as opposed to, say, someone's opinion that they are). Makgraf 20:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree the heading of that part in not very good. I already proposed to split the criticism in Client, Service, and I propose to keep the privacy issues seperate.Martijn Hoekstra 22:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The header has been changed, and I think the time might be ripe to remove the {POV-section} tag. The section does still need some cleaning and styling, but that's not a POV matter. Martijn Hoekstra 17:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed the POV tag, as it's no longer a point of view issue, but more a minor bias, if anything. I'd say it's good as it is, and the article in general qualifies for its good article rating. P3net 03:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The point about the calendar being unavailable with languages other than English (US) is not specific enough. I currently have mine set as English (UK) and have no problem accessing the calendar. Which non English (US) languages cannot use the calendar? Trig 10:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

The date format does not appear to be limited to MM-DD-YYYY. It appears as DD-m (01-Feb), dropping the year if it is still the current year. Once the year differs, English (US) language displays the dates as MM-DD-YYYY and English (UK) displays the dates as DD-MM-YYYY. Trig 10:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Mail Fetcher

I'm planning to add a section under "Features" detailing the in-progress Mail Fetcher addition. If anyone objects or has an opinion, please let me know. I'll do the writing some time in the next few days. -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  23:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, sure, go ahead. Put it in the Addresses section, under Features. Mambo Jambo 20:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Will do. I'm working on what to write now. -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  00:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Added. I edited some other things in that section, too. -- Tuvok^^{Talk|Desk|Contribs}  00:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Gmail open for signups

Just spotted that Gmail is open for signups as of this morning.

I added it to the end of the 'Registration' section, but that section needs a slight re-write (change parts to past tense, etc...) PlazzTT 08:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

What? I'm looking at Gmail right now, and no where is there anything about "open" signups. Proto Dude 19:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it is. Go to the log in page, and it is right below the username password text fields. They also seem to have switched to google mail from Gmail, though I'm not certain if it's for everyone.James Delgado 00:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Gmail doesn't seem open for signups, at least not in Singapore. I clicked "Sign up for Gmail", and was prompted to enter my mobile phone number. If Gmail has made signups open to all, wouldn't several newspapers report about it? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 06:17, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Now it is - source [1] and [2] --TheTallOne 11:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Was Gmail open for signups on February 7, 2007? I first saw the Sign Up link on February 13, 2007. Then, on February 14, 2007, Gmail announced it on their Blog. Speedboxer 04:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

On August 9, 2006, Gmail registration is public in Australia. Why did February 7, 2007, it's public in Australia again? Vinhtantran 13:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Google Mail in the UK? Or not?

Just noticed that these two sections of the article seem to contradict:

• "Gmail, known as Google Mail in Germany and the United Kingdom, ... "
• "On December 14, 2006, at a cost of over $4 million, Google obtained the rights to the gmail.co.uk domain and is now accepting gmail.com addresses for United Kingdom users."

So is it back to Gmail in the UK? If so, the opening sentence should be changed. PlazzTT 00:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Trying to sign up for a new account still offers me a Googlemail.com address, and the gmail.co.uk domain doesn't forward to Gmail as you might expect, so I'm not really sure what's going on here. Idumea 16:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

The second statement is totally incorrect, so I've removed it from the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MamboJambo (talk • contribs) 19:49, March 4, 2007.

Hey guys, isnt it "also known" as google mail everywhere, and its just those two countrys that its not titled Gmail? Maybe the opening line could reflect that, something like: "Gmail, also known as Google Mail, including the UK and Germany (where this is its official name)". I don't edit this article so I won't make the change or anything, so its just a friendly suggestion :)
Ferdia O'Brien The Archiver And The Vandal Watchman 19:44, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Google can't use the Gmail name in the UK at all. So use of gmail.co.uk addresses would still fall under that I guess, seeing as it contains "gmail". They probably just secured the domain for a future redirect. --A Cornish Pasty 22:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Problems with Gmail and hotmail, yahoo

People have reported issues with gmail and hotmail. For example, I constantly get "Delivery Status Notification": failure messages sent to my spam box on hotmail when REPLYING to a known gmail address. My message in turn doesnt go through. A similar error occurs when some gmail accounts send to me. Supposedly, yahoo also has blocked gmail invitation requests. 134.121.179.87 21:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Google Paper: Talking too soon.

The article seems to say that Google Paper is a fact. We don't really know this, the whole idea seems quite ridiculous. The reference http://mail.google.com/mail/help/paper/more.html should at least have been laid down. (I don't know how to reference myself. If this is to be left there at least put the reference there. Tank 12:28, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I haven't looked in the article yet, but if this is mentioned as a feature it shouldn't be. This appears to be one of Google's 2007 April Fool's jokes (click the "Program Policies" link at the bottom of the page you gave). I'm going to check the article now to make sure this is gone. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 00:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, phew. Gmail Paper is now said to be a joke in the article. Glad someone did that (not me, unfortunately). — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 00:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I like how the part about Gmail Paper is still mentioned as a joke, but I don't think that the Announcement portion of Product Development is the appropriate place for it. If it is to be kept, it should be put elsewhere. Any suggestions? --Entoaggie09 04:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Is the explanation of Google Paper at such great length necessary? It was an April Fool's Day gag - I don't think it needs more than a passing reference. If someone really wants to include it, why not create a 'Google April Fool's Day Jokes' page? Demosthenes X 21:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

LOL! The Google Paper was an APRILs FOOLS GAG!!! Gautam ^Discuss 19:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

SKYMAIL

WHY did someone remove the part I added in ages ago about their deal with sky? It was all good information, I added source and some fool removed it. It makes no sense. Crazy fool. 80.229.241.200 13:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't a direct deal with Gmail. It was an overall Google deal, so I moved it to the main Google article. Mambo Jambo 17:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Philosophy

Can someone write about the design philosophy behind Gmail? For example, one of thing they promote is that this is a new way to do email because you are supposed to keep all your old email ready to retrieval in case you need to look it up. We also used to cleaning up our mail box regularly and Google told us to stop doing that. That is a 180° change in how email is used. There should be more discussion on this topic in the article. Kowloonese 01:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorting in gmail

Have any of the more serendipitous of you kind folks out there discovered any workarounds, any kludges, any clumsy or inelegant solutions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kludge for those of us who like to sort gmail, spam and trash in alternate ways, alphabetically, by author, by size, by number of lines and so forth?... serendipity through varied types sortings

Or have the more serendipitous of you kind folks discovered how to search by initial sequences of characters in the Subject lines of messages?... for example searching for all message Subjects beginning with ab*, ac*, ad* and so forth or searching for all message subjects beginning with a particular word or words.

Forwarding gmail messages to Yahoo mail has been one problematical method of doing this. Any other ideas?... hints?, tips?, pointers?dsaklad@zurich.csail.mit.edu 11:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

How the Heck?

How the heck does GMAIL offer so much space? How can they afford to have nearly 2.8GB for each user? Do they just hope that we all don't use all the space given to us? Can someone explain? Gautam ^Discuss 20:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, they've got more than one hard drive in their main office... Mambo Jambo 22:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

LOL! That's a good one...OF COURSE they do :p ... I am still wondering how they do it. Gautam ^Discuss 19:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Also consider the fact that, although each user is allotted 2.8GB of space, most aren't using that much so the total capacity in use is much less than you'd expect. I've had my account since a month or two after launch, and have an extensive amount of large email attachments, thousands of lengthy emails, and still only have used about 15% of my capacity. DMW 14:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Storage Space

I am rather surprised that this did not com up earlier, but how often should the storage space be updated? Every 100 Megabytes? 10? As often as possible? I would suggest every 50 Megabytes, unless this issue was previously resolved. Laptopdude 00:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with an update every 50MB. Otherwise, updates would be occuring too frequently. DMW 14:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Random users have been updating the storage every MB increment lately. This is really unnecessary. I say an update every 10MB is sufficient. 50MB might be a little much, since storage increases so slowly. 10MB seems like a reasonable interval. It keeps the numbers nice and round. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 21:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll agree with that. Every 10MB would require 15 updates to the article per year, which seems reasonable. DMW 15:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

A little over once a month is OK. I've been seeing users, mostly anons, actually, updating the storage space sometimes to things like 2858.251235123412 MB (not an actual example, but similar), which is an absurd degree of precision. — Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 23:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

There is a note there (or there used to be, I'll check if it's still there) that it doesn't need updating to be accurate to the megabyte, but when users do choose to update, we have to consider if we want constant reverting to a 'round' number which doesn't imply as much accurency, but means there will be a lot of reverting. Martijn Hoekstra 10:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Note was gone, put it back up.Martijn Hoekstra 10:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to know if the claimed storage space per user matches actual total capacity or if it's overstated based on likely % usage (like airlines oversell seats because a % of people don't turn up) as well as the fact that text emails can be heavily compressed. Could every last gmail user pack their inbox to the limit with compressed files without the servers running out of space? The reason I ask is that the article reads as if the limit per user is literal and keeps literally increasing. 15.219.233.70 01:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I have not read anything indicating that it's an average based on likely usage. I've only read absolutes. Outside of any information to the contrary, it should be taken as a literal limit. -- 12.116.162.162 20:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

has google ever recycled a user name?

I deleted my username becuase it had dots in the log in and I didn't realize it would be lost for 9 mo to eternity to get the same username without dots. Has a username been recycled yet? Any confirmations?

GMail changing to Google Mail elsewhere?

I've noticed this week that the GMail logo I've been accustomed has changed to the Google Mail one. I'm from Colombia, and I ignore if there actually is any copyright issue on the GMail name there Juanchito2006 14:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I went to [tt]www.google.com.co[/tt] and then go to Gmail, I still saw Gmail logo and the text "Bienvenido a Gmail". I don't see any change there. Vinhtantran 02:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm in Ireland and it just changed to Google Mail 86.42.134.235 20:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

@Vinhtantran, I think it checks your IP's location of origin, not which version of the site you access. aido2002 23:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm in the U.S., and it's now Google Mail. 64.213.150.63 04:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Mainland China trademarks subsection

Someone inserted information on "Mainland China" under the trademark disputes section, but did not supply evidence that this conflict was disputed, nor even a reference to a source saying this. Should this be left in the article? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 23:24, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Some info about "G-Mail"?

Since this G-Mail company seems to be gaining popularity due to its lawsuit with Google in Germany, maybe we could cover them a little better? People might like to know who they are since googling for "g-mail" just translates to "gmail" anyhow... -Matt 14:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

2874, 2875...

Why are we writing anything more specific than "over 2 Gb of free storage" - which will be true until they go under 2 Gb of free storage. Schissel | Sound the Note! 16:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I found that it's silly how people just keep updating the figures (and not to forget, only one by not both). I think we need to address the issue. --Cyktsui 10:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Sources

There are several instances of the "citation needed" tag in this article. Thats seems a little ridiculous since I'm sure Google has an FAQ, an about page or something that could provide a citation (I have no idea how to add citation myself and am too lazy to bother figuring it out; don't tell me how either).Eno-Etile 00:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

No need, just give me the links to the specific faq pages for the specific cites needed, and I'll add them in Martijn Hoekstra 23:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Gmail notifier

Hi,

I've been investigating the security of the Gmail notifier. I've discovered that it receives email addresses, titles and snippets in the clear. Additionally, when you check your mail, it sends the browser to the http site, not the https site, with no option to change. There is a hack to fix the problem: http://www.wikihow.com/Hack-Gmail-Notifier-to-Use-SSL.

Is this information worth adding to the Security section? - Camacan 07:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

y6

hi

9030MB of Space and other new features

I have extra capacity in Gmail, 9030MB (8.8GB) Anyone else getting this? As well as more storage space for all the other Google features. I know other people have here: [3]

DELETED TEXT

WHY USER Adsims2001 HAS DELETED TEXT FROM THE GMAIL ARTICLE ?

89.26.241.36 13:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I just looked at the last 50 changes made to the page - I don't see a user named Adsims2001 in the recent history. Can you post a link to the change you're referring to? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 08:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Are you referring to this edit, by any chance? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 08:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

THAT IS EXACTLY THE CHANGE I HAVE MENTIONED. SORRY, BUT I FORGOT TO LOGIN THE FIRST TIME. - A41202813@GMAIL.COM 22:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

It may be that the problem went away, or it went too long without sourcing (note the removed {{fact}} tag at the end). Perhaps you should contact Adsims2001 on their talk page and ask directly. Include the link to the edit so they'll know what you're talking about. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 02:19, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

PS: Please stop using ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. Netiquette defines it as a form of shouting (see first item in list), which is often hard on the eyes when reading conversations. Thanks!

ALL CAPS IS LEET. STOP BEING A N00B. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.90.124 (talk) 00:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Good_practice, all caps, bold, italic, and the like should be reserved for purposes of emphasis. Such formatting can also undermine an otherwise well-reasoned argument. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 18:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

According to WP:IAR, I hereby grant myself the full right to edit others' comments if there are in caps lock when (I decide) they should not be. --Kushal^{Click me!} write to me 04:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

New Provider branding section

Now that I think about it, the new section's example of Sky Broadband sounds like an example of Google Apps. Does anyone have more information on this interface? Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 08:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Weird text as you log out of Gmail

What exactly is that non-english text that is displayed as you are in the process of signing out of Gmail? Any translations? Been curious for months.... 137.155.205.45 03:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you're probably seeing "Please wait..." in a foreign language. That's what my account says when I log out, at any rate. It's strange that the displayed text isn't in your home language; whatever language you have set in your Google Account should display I would think, but for some reason it's not. My mom has the same issue; her account displays "Esperé, por favor..." (Spanish) even though her language is set to English (US). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Voyagerfan5761 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Like vs unlike

When the article says "However, when a gmail message is sent to another email address of a different provider, there will be no advertisements in the message like most other email providers." Does it mean "However, when a gmail message is sent to another email address of a different provider, there will be no advertisements in the message unlike most other email providers." ?? --Do not click me! 21:48, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Please cite

When a Gmail mailbox is full, it's not possible to search for emails by size in order to delete the largest ones first. The best the web interface can do is to search for emails with attachments, but it does not indicate what the sizes of those attachments are.

I think we need a citation for the above. What do you think? Has anyone tried it? Please try to answewr here or see if it meets No original research or if it qualifies (according to you) as ignore all rules if you want to edit the article directly. Or maybe, just be bold WP:BOLD! --21:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)~ --Do not click me! 21:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC) --21:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

No takers? Does it mean I can start thinking about removing the statement? --Kushal^{Click me!} write to me 04:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

This section is closed because the disputed text no longer exists. --Kushal^{Click me!} write to me 04:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Citation will Blogspot work?

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/08/simple-way-to-get-more-storage.html

According to our article,

Gmail offers just over 2900 megabytes of free storage, with an additional 6 GB available for US$20 per year.

<!-- Please cite this comment. Is it a fact. Is it reported elsewhere? I will unilaterally delete this sentence anytime after September 31, 2007. If you find you citation after that time, you will have to revert my change AND come up with a good citation. Thank you. -->.

I made the previous comment and went hunting on google only to find the message is legit. However, I still prefer an illine citation for it. Will the above link work? Can we link to blogs? Please let me know. --Do not click me! 00:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Multipleidentitynumberthree (talk • contribs) 23:51, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Adding citation, please remove if blogs cannot be cited

Official blogs are OK. --Kaypoh 09:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. --Kushal^{Click me!} write to me 20:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Gmail storage newsflash!

A post on the Official Gmail Blog states that Google is increasing the storage counter rate. In my informal tests, I clocked it at about 4 to 5 MB per hour. The original post is here. The Storage section is definitely going to need to be rewritten to reflect this. I'll do it tomorrow, if nobody else does (though I'd like to, so if you see this... you know...). Late afternoon, after the blogosphere buzz dies down a bit; maybe there'll be some good sources other than the Gmail Blog, too. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 09:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot to mention that this happened around 12-1 AM Pacific, today (Oct. 12). As in a little over four hours ago. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 09:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Google storage upgrades upgraded

Also, forgot to mention that Google's paid storage upgrades have been updated. $20 now buys ten gigs instead of six.

I'll just rewrite the relevant sections now. I was going to go to sleep, but I tried and couldn't. Stupid interwebs... ;) Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 09:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Modifications complete. I don't think I missed anything (who ever does?), but if I did and you catch it, please drop me a line so I know. Thanks! Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 10:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Now removed

I am removing the word "now" from the storage sentence. Please revert, if you think appropriate. --Kushal^t 00:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Click this button for direct access to the revert tool. (I GUARANTEE that I will not revert your revert within a 24 hour period.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kushal one (talk • contribs) 00:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC) [4]

Nuh-uh. That's a better way of phrasing it. Lewis Collard! (rock me mama like a southbound train) 21:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

New counter frequency begs slower storage updates

Since Google's new storage algorithm increases the storage about 120 MB per day, the 100 MB increase interval just doesn't work anymore. Having an update every day about the current storage is too frequent. I suggest a 1,000 MB update interval, and have edited the page's comments to reflect that. Feel free to revert if you think daily updates are a good thing. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 11:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Not yet!

Gmail does not yet have 3.5 GB storage. Take a breath (or cite your sources). My log in page says about 3502 MB which translates to 3.42 GB. Please cite your sources if you are making controversial edits. [5] --Kushal^t 22:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Unless Gigabyte#Gigabytes_vs_gigabits is wrong, 3.5 gigabytes (3.5GB) is 3500 megabytes (3500MB). It would appear that the legacy usage was for 1GB == 1024MB. However, this is now only true for computer memory. In terms of storage, it is 1GB == 1000MB. I should point out that I am just as confused (and I come from a computer-related background - might be worth looking at Gigabyte#Consumer_confusion too!) ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 23:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

It's rather irrelevant, I think. Updates of 1 GB should be sufficient. That's 1 GB == 1,024 MB. Given the article's statement of storage in whole-number gigabytes, using fractional gigs doesn't make much sense to me. Tuvok[^T@lk/_{Improve me}] 02:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Or lets update it every minute! --Kushal^t 20:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I like his ideaLink287 06:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Gmail uses DomainKeys?

According to [6], gmail uses SPF records. It seems to suggest that Gmail does not use DomainKeys itself but only encourages it. --Kushal^t 19:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

This error was not caused by Gmail, but by a recipient domain using callback verification.

Callback verification is an anti-spam technique used by SMTP (mail server) software. When a domain using this strategy receives a message from a new server, it replies with a blank message to ensure the sending server exists. Because these blank replies may be sent very frequently, it can resemble a Denial of Service (DoS) attack. For these reasons, Gmail does not support sender verification.

Gmail uses Sender Policy Framework (SPF) records (see http://www.openspf.org to specify which hosts are permitted to send email, making it hard to forge 'From:' addresses. We strongly encourage other webmail providers to adopt SPF or DomainKeys as a more effective method of fighting spam.

To fix this problem, we suggest contacting the recipient domain and asking them to whitelist Gmail from callback verification.

If this didn't help, please choose another option or visit the Gmail Help Discussion Forum for more information..

This quote is from the option Sender verification failed. --Kushal^t 19:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

IMAP

i'm not up to the task of updating the article, but as of tonight, gmail supports imap