Jump to content

Talk:Yahoo! Mail: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 619524307 by 76.4.97.75 (talk)
→‎POP3 Access: new section
Line 43: Line 43:


The link given for Yahoo mail Korea does not work. Koreans with Yahoo accounts have told me they had to switch to Yahoo.com. [[Special:Contributions/211.225.33.95|211.225.33.95]] ([[User talk:211.225.33.95|talk]]) 04:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
The link given for Yahoo mail Korea does not work. Koreans with Yahoo accounts have told me they had to switch to Yahoo.com. [[Special:Contributions/211.225.33.95|211.225.33.95]] ([[User talk:211.225.33.95|talk]]) 04:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

== POP3 Access ==

As of October 2014, it appears that POP3 access is no longer a premium service, but instead available to all subscribers, even in the United States. [[Special:Contributions/173.2.58.242|173.2.58.242]] ([[User talk:173.2.58.242|talk]]) 09:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:52, 20 October 2014

Opening Yahoo email accounts

! in Name

this edit removed the ! symbol from the name in the infobox and various other places, including in category names. The category changes were recently reverted. The guidance at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks is:

"Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, or simply substitute for English words (e.g., ♥ used for "love"). In the article about a trademark, it is acceptable to use decorative characters the first time the trademark appears, but thereafter, an alternative that follows the standard rules of punctuation should be used[.]"

In line with that, should we have a local consensus to prefer "Yahoo" to "Yahoo!"? If so, should that include proposing a rename of the related categories? DES (talk) 16:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page cleanup?

I noticed that user:Ukexpat has removed 5,984 bytes from this talkpage in this edit. Did anyone check it? Wouldn't it be better to set up an archive for old discussions rather than allowing user discretion about which postings are appropriate here? XOttawahitech (talk) 16:15, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Everything I removed was "support forum" stuff and clearly not aimed at improving the article. Happy for it it to be reviewed, but if I am right, it doesn't belong in an archive either. --ukexpat (talk) 20:05, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ottawahitech: as ukexpat says, the material does not belong here, as it is not discussion about the article. But it does look useful. You could copy it to a subpage of your user page, to preserve it; though few people would be likely to find it there. Maproom (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Ukexpat: @Maproom: While you, and other editors who know you, may feel this way, try to put yourself in the shoes of an editor who does not know you. All they can see is that you removed a large chunk of text contributed by other editors in good faith. Would you blindly trust such reverts? Who should police this page to make sure only "support forum stuff text" is removed? XOttawahitech (talk) 20:06, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
there are no police on Wikipedia. However, our policies are clear on what talk pages of article should and shouldn't be used for. Asking support questions about yahoo mail is clearly out of bounds. I don't see any consensus to restore those comments, so absent many other editors defending the utility of those comments wrt this article, they should remain iced.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:31, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Obiwankenobi: There are also clear guidelines about the removal of other editors comments on talkpages. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:41, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My view is that destroying content will indeed invite suspicion. But moving it elsewhere (as I suggested), with a note explaining why and where it has gone, will allay much of this suspicion. Maproom (talk) 20:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

XOttawahitech (talk) 15:18, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Korea

The link given for Yahoo mail Korea does not work. Koreans with Yahoo accounts have told me they had to switch to Yahoo.com. 211.225.33.95 (talk) 04:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

POP3 Access

As of October 2014, it appears that POP3 access is no longer a premium service, but instead available to all subscribers, even in the United States. 173.2.58.242 (talk) 09:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]