Talk:AT&T

Telefónica blurb

I have a couple of issues with this blurb:

== In 2013, the Spanish Government would have dampened a friendly takeover attempt of AT&T on Telefónica, valued in 122,000 million euros. Such an impediment would be justified in the strategic nature of the company and AT&T would have taken a step backward.[11] ==

1. I have a hard time parsing this. What does this mean exactly? Who was to take over whom?
2. It seems highly speculative and vague. For instance, what does "...would have taken a step backward" refer to?
3. Why is this blurb shown in such a prominent place in the article? It is, at best, of regional interest, not critical to the (history of the) company as a whole... Perhaps a separate "subsidiaries" type section would do?

Too much penis & weeds in lead paragraph, not enough cogent summary

existing horror show

AT&T is the second largest provider of mobile telephone services and the largest provider of fixed telephone services[8] in the United States, and also provides broadband subscription television services through DirecTV. AT&T is the third-largest company in Texas (the largest non-oil company, behind only ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips, and also the largest Dallas company).[9] As of May 2014, AT&T is the 23rd-largest company in the world as measured by a composite of revenues, profits, assets and market value,[10] and the 16th-largest non-oil company.[11] AT&T is the largest telecommunications company in the world by revenue. As of 2016, it is also the 17th-largest mobile telecom operator in the world, with 130.4 million mobile customers.[12] AT&T was ranked at #6 on the 2015 rankings of the world's most valuable brands published by Millward Brown Optimor.

The reward for making it through all this penis wagging? The reader is plunged straight into a quagmire of fine print:

AT&T Inc. began its existence as Southwestern Bell Corporation, one of seven Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOC's) created in 1983 in the divestiture of the American Telephone and Telegraph Company (founded 1885, later AT&T Corp.) following the 1982 United States v. AT&T antitrust lawsuit. Southwestern Bell changed its name to SBC Communications Inc. in 1995. In 2005, SBC purchased former parent AT&T Corp. and took on its branding, with the merged entity naming itself AT&T Inc. and using the iconic AT&T Corp. logo and stock-trading symbol.

suggested serving

What the first paragraph of the lead should look like, if this were written for the benefit of the harried reader:

AT&T Inc. is an American multinational telecommunications conglomerate, headquartered at Whitacre Tower in downtown Dallas, Texas. Within the United States, AT&T is the the largest provider of fixed telephone services and a leading provider of mobile telephone and broadband subscription television. AT&T Inc. began its existence as Southwestern Bell Corporation, one of seven Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOC's) created in 1983 in the divestiture of the American Telephone and Telegraph Company.

AT&T can trace its origin back to the original Bell Telephone Company founded by Alexander Graham Bell after his invention of the telephone. In 2005, SBC purchased AT&T for $16 billion. After this purchase, SBC adopted the AT&T name and brand. The original 1885 AT&T still exists as the long-distance phone subsidiary of this company. Although the current AT&T as a corporate structure has only existed since 1983, the company has adopted the original AT&T's history as its own. The current AT&T reconstitutes much of the former Bell System and includes ten of the original 22 Bell Operating Companies, along with the original long distance division.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, AT&T is the second-largest donor to United States political campaigns, and the top American corporate donor, having contributed more than US$47.7 million since 1990, 56% of which went to Republicans and 44% of which went to Democrats. During the period of 1998 to 2010, the company expended US$130 million on lobbying in the United States. A key political issue for AT&T has been the question of which businesses win the right to profit by providing broadband internet access in the United States.

AT&T finds the continued burden of operating rural landlines really annoying. AT&T stated that it would declare the intentions for its rural landlines on November 7, 2012.

The company maintains a database of call detail records of all telephone calls that have passed through its network since 1987. In 2006, the Electronic Frontier Foundation lodged a class action lawsuit, Hepting v. AT&T, which alleged that AT&T had allowed agents of the National Security Agency (NSA) to monitor phone and Internet communications of AT&T customers without warrants. If true, this would violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and the First and Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. AT&T has yet to confirm or deny that monitoring by the NSA is occurring.

In January 2008, the company reported plans to begin filtering all Internet traffic which passes through its network for intellectual property violations.

In June 2010, a hacker group known as Goatse Security discovered a vulnerability within AT&T that could allow anyone to uncover email addresses belonging to customers of AT&T 3G service for the Apple iPad.

In March 2012, the United States federal government announced a lawsuit against AT&T. The specific accusations state that AT&T "violated the False Claims Act by facilitating and seeking federal payment for IP Relay calls by international callers who were ineligible for the service and sought to use it for fraudulent purposes.

In October 2016, AT&T reached a deal to buy Time Warner for over $80 billion. If approved by federal regulators, the merger would bring AT&T's telecommunication holdings under the same umbrella as HBO, Turner Broadcasting System and the Warner Bros. studio.

That from a five-minute cut and paste job, mainly from existing text. I hate this article in its present state too much to touch it. Finally, notice the phrase "declare the intentions", lifted from existing text. A bit of an Orwellian ring there. That's a subtle long distancing word, as in the famous "that woman", is it not? — MaxEnt 13:56, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I came to the talk page wondering if anyone felt the same way as me about the opening paragraph. It could use some work for sure. At the moment, it looks like a bullet point list squashed into one tight paragraph:

AT&T is <this>. AT&T is <that>. AT&T was <the other>.

The first two suggested replacement paragraphs read so much better. PatchWar (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree that the two replacement paragraphs are far better. It appears there is consensus, and there having been no objections in the last six months, I have gone ahead and made the change. Kendall-K1 (talk) 01:54, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@MaxEnt, PatchWar, and El C: Care to discuss? Kendall-K1 (talk) 02:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I just couldn't find your comment because it was added to a six month-old section, but I have no immediate objections at this time. Next time, maybe add a note at the bottom, directing editors to the old section. El_C 02:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Against. See Apple Inc., Google, Verizon Communications. You removed a lot of important information (for example, the fact that the company began its history as Southwestern Bell Telephone Company). Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 19:45, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

My opinion is the the new version is a great improvement, and we would do better to add back in what you feel is missing than to revert the whole thing. As a compromise I have removed the worst of the mess while leaving in the part about SBTC. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 21:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

AT&T Subsidiaries as of 2017

While waiting for a different opinion to the Request Move 2017 section, AT&T Inc. has recently created new subsidiaries. I think we should update the subsidiaries section or creat a new article about all of the current AT&T Inc. subsidiaries currently in existence and only list the primary subsidiaries in the subsidiaries section of the AT&T Inc. article. The article should only include current AT&T Inc. subsidiaries.Granthew (talk) 03:03, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Edits regarding the Time Warner purchase

As you all know, AT&T now 100% own the company formerly known as Time Warner Inc. (and all it divisions and subsidiaries) as of June 14th, 2018. AT&T page needs a complete makeover plus that chart is outdated. AT&T Media as it informally known until we know the new name also need a total makeover on it page. We can all do this.

Thanks, BBMatBlood. 07:25, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

A) do not shout in section headers, nor make them vague. I've changed the header to fix that. B) the purchase is not yet complete, and we don't know the final details. We'll get to it as it becomes clear. You can just slow down and wait like the rest of us. oknazevad (talk) 10:40, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Media seems to be saying they've completed the takeover https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44492201 – numbermaniac 10:42, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I was not aware of that. That said, we still should proceed with care, and not all-caps shouting haste. oknazevad (talk) 10:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, no need to rush and get it wrong in the process. – numbermaniac 11:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

First sentence

Hi all, I recently made an edit to the first line of the article: [1]

• AT&T Inc. is an American multinational conglomerate holding company headquartered at Whitacre Tower in Downtown Dallas, Texas.

however User:General_Ization reverted the edit, stating:

AT&T Inc. is an American multinational conglomerate holding company, as previously stated.

on their 2nd revert, after seeking clarification for the reason why.

Rather than get into an edit war, it would be better to come to consensus amongst the community. I think a more sentence of what the company does would be better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angryskies (talk • contribs) 14:00, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Your proposed opening sentence was: "'''AT&T Inc.''' is an [[Untied States|American]] telecommunications & media company based in [[Dallas]], [[Texas]]." Since this is factually incorrect, your edit was reverted. Also note a) typo and b) WP:AMPERSAND. You're right to bring it here rather than edit war over it, but I'm not sure what there is to discuss. General Ization ^Talk 14:17, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Old AT&T Corp (American Telephone & Telegraph Co) became New AT&T Inc. (Southwestern Bell/SBC)...

In every sense from owning the former parent, taking it name, logo, stock ticker, and claiming origins going back to 1885 (see Xander page, see 25th Anniversary of AT&T prediction). We could merge or not merge both pages since it will be unprecedentedly long but if CBS Corp. founded in 2006 can trace it history to that of Westinghouse which rename to CBS in 1997 then same thing here or even look at Atari SA and Atari Inc. with the only exception in this type of corporate structure (working on a name for it lol; working title is Old Brand becomes New: Father becomes Son. The tales of AT&T, CBS, Atari, and THQ) being THQ Nordic and THQ Inc. Thank you.BBMatBlood (talk) 03:53, 7 January 2019 (UTC)