Talk:Mail.com

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

There is no longer a useful news feed on logout, as claimed by the introductory section. There is a short blurb page with mostly mail.com specific content. At the top is a video frame labelled "sponsored news" which gives a side scroll list of videos that are uniformly cotton candy pop celebrity fare - nothing that actually qualifies as news.

Moreover, one could, for about a week, obtain the news by changing the url from

  mail.com/int/logout/

to

  mail.com/int/news/

But as yesterday, that gave a not found error, and as of today, it just redirects to the same page provided at logout. This is a very significant impairment of the portal service and warrants inclusion in the wiki page, along with removal of the incorrect information, but I'm not sure how to go about including the information in an acceptable way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.28.27 (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody who is worried about their security should inform them via the link on https://twofactorauth.org/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siouxchief (talk • contribs) 08:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two factor authoristion is a bloody nuisance. Presumably you work for the organization promoting it? 86.153.24.75 (talk) 11:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is a nuisance. On yahoo mail I have been locked out from using my mobile due to this. There was no "option." I am editing the article to refelect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.143.62.105 (talk) 09:51, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The security section of this article is superfluous and only seems to be there to stimulate bias. The explanation of what 2-factor authentication is unnecessary and mostly irrelevant in the context of entries for a particular website. Simply state they do use 2FA and let people look up the relevant wiki entry if they want to know more. The section reads like an ad for 2fa. Czarnibog (talk) 23:55, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

---BEGIN MITCH from Waco Comment-- I also believe the security section is a bit superfluous. There's no need to spend multiple sentences trying to sell 2FA authentication and speculate about which other sites have it. That being said, it is notable that this is one of the few that doesn't have it. Thank GOD it doesn't, in my humble opinion. 24.155.31.237 (talk) 11:08, 12 March 2019 (UTC) Mitch from Waco[reply]

Lots of mail dot com employees on here discrediting 2FA when the rest of the world successfully use it. Such a shame Wikipedia allowed their edits. Tvdoormat (talk) 08:44, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Altavista used to offer "lifetime free" email. There must have been some cooperation between Altavista and Mail.com because I have an iname account ([email protected]) registered from Altavista's site. (Meaning I could choose @iname even though I was making my registration from Altavista)

Please add something about this slice of history (that mail.com operates what used to be Altavista's email service). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.229.34.175 (talk) 13:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mail.com premium help desk have just 'reminded' me that europe.com is no longer available. I have been paying for a @europe.com mailbox for over 15 years. Does anyone know if they are about to do the same as with London.com? --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 23:39, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Belay that. The premium help desk have just admitted they were talking complete nonsense and the europe.com domain is still a normal part of the service. Customer service at its best?--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 12:35, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But recover Given a "secret question" for the password asked another "secret question". why?Postfachmailcom (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC) <Mail.com> the Ciber-Spy Server ?PittBraed² (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the "Feature" section the statement, "Email users that have had the domain of <user>@soon.com were abruptly notified that their email account is being terminated and there was nothing they can do about it" was given a reference but it's the wrong reference. It points to the company's terms page which says nothing about "soon.com" and the abrupt service closure. I feel this needs removed or referenced appropriately. Thisisfutile (talk) 13:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mail.com. 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/20080331061027/http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1032477/2/index.htm to http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1032477/2/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:39, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

l was on mail .com on my tablet you would not accept my correct mother's maiden name my correct date of birth my correct email because you would not allow on on my new phone Some ididiot nknocked me off my mail .com on my tablet that was really lame stupid expressing how dumb you are no excuse for stupidity 2603:8000:8BF0:8F50:9075:3D8E:B4BF:8DDA (talk) 05:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]