Talk:Classmates.com

List of social networking websites on AfD

List of social networking websites is currently an AfD candidate. You are invited to partake in this discussion. Czj 18:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

ClassMates.com Ads

Is there any significance to the man and woman who show up most often in the Classmates.com banner ads? I'm specifically referring to the ads captioned "She married him?!" (some versions add, "They had 7 kids?") It seems that either those two people are incredibly famous or they're the two most abused, random people on the internet.

I was thinking the same exact thing! Here's an interesting link you might enjoy. --Mentaka 23:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Most of the folks in the ads were employees. The Seattle Times recently ran an article about the "She married him?!" pair. Meonkeys 07:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Relevance to MyPoints.com page

Why does clicking on the wikipedia page for MyPoints.com bring me to the classmates.com page? They're unrelated! Maggie 23:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Because someone created a redirect. Here's a comment from the MyPoints.com talk page:

We need an article here. In the meantime, I redirect to classmates.com, cuz they seem to be quite partnered, if not owned by the same entity. Mathiastck 20:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest that you leave a message on Mathiastck's talk page or contact an Admin. I've never tried to undo a redirect so I'm not sure how it works. Good luck. MoodyGroove 02:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove

I agree. Just because they're both owned by the same company doesn't mean they're anything close to the same thing. It would be like if the Juno.com page redirected here; it makes no sense. If anything, and if it has to be redirected anywhere, it should probably be to the United Online page until it has its own. Tnalicea 03:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Classmates On Television

In 2003, Classmates.com entered into a production partnership with Fox/20th Television to create a reality show based in part on reunions fostered via the Classmates.com website. The show, a daily half hour syndicated property called "Classmates TV" aired on Fox's owned and operated stations throughout the United States. Classmates TV was cancelled after ninety-five episodes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottbaillie (talk • contribs) 06:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: the use of "allegedly fraudulent"

I don't think the wording of the following is as accurate as it could/should be--from the article:

"Classmates.com also routinely sends spam e-mails indicating that one of the recipient's classmates is looking for him/her. Frequently this is untrue, and Classmates.com currently faces a lawsuit for this allegedly fraudulent practice.[16]"

I think "allegedly" is more properly applicable to the phrase "frequently this is untrue". That's the part that is alleged. If it is untrue, there is no doubt that sending such an email is fraudulent. Thus, I would reword the 2nd sentence as:

"Allegedly, this is frequently untrue, and Classmates.com currently faces a lawsuit for this fraudulent practice.[16]"

I was going to simply note this, but I've decided to actually make the change on the page.

Rhkramer (talk) 12:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality

Several passages in this article read like an advertisement for Classmates.com, especially the Business Model and Ownership sections. For example, the information in Business Model is only positive, including some awards that seem insignificant, and in Ownership the phrase "Classmates Media operates leading online social networking and loyalty marketing services" is biased - how do we define 'leading'?

The second sentence in the introduction also has a promotional tone ("The social media website helps members find, connect and keep in touch with friends and acquaintances from throughout their lives — including kindergarten, primary school, high school, college, work and the United States military."). 72.43.171.39 (talk) 16:47, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with this comment. Therefore I've completely revised the page for NPOV. I've also updated a lot of the very old information and added recent news about the NY Atty General's settlements. Londonbroil (talk) 22:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Possible Scam

I had 3 friends in high school,two are now dead. I registered a free account on Classmates and they want me to pay $15 USD(minimum) to find out who the 13 people are who are trying to locate me. I smell a rat.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianAlex (talk • contribs) 15:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC) 

Popup Ads on Classmates

There are no so many popup ads on classmates that you can not get rid of until it makes it almost imposible to scroll through the pages, I will not be renewing my membership after this year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.227.18.116 (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Be SURE that you get a verification of your cancellation! I didn't and they renewed me at 39.00 with no way to dispute it. Horrible customer service. Said they had no supervisors on duty and that they would call me back the next day. BS!

I finally gave up and took thier Gold (Brass is more like it!) membership for $15 for three months. Ten minutes later it was $7.50 for three months. And I STILL can't get any messages because I have a free and a gold account. What does upgrade mean? I have to do away with the free account, but any attempt I make just puts me into a closed loop. And where do you even find a phone number for their lousy customer service. This site stinks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.28.94.156 (talk) 23:57, 20 October 2010 (UTC) want results. Call the CEO direct, really pisses him off but I got my money back and gave him a piece of my mind, you can too. His name is Mark Goldston. Classmates parent company is called American Online. To reach him call 818-287-3000 then press 3 then press 1 for woodland hills office then press 465 then press 2 now you got the CEO, give him hell.

The direct line to the legal dept is 818-287-3316 his name is Tony Detoro call him too ceo home number 818-784-4424 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.9.0.208 (talk) 02:24, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

POV check

Hello. I think that enough discussion has happened (and flags are in place) to warrant a proper check. To me this page lacks neutrality and reads like an advertisement for Classmates.com. Anneaholaward (talk) 23:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

References

Business Model section

I think it makes sense to remove the "business model" section all together and replace it with a "history" section like all of the other articles in the social media series.

Anyone agree? A. Ward (talk) 18:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Since nobody objects I will go ahead and make this change... A. Ward (talk) 01:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Potentially inconsistent information

Hello.

I have copyedited the page for better readability and more accurate meaning of wording, but just noticed two sections with potentially conflicting information already on the page (from before I edited; I simply divided it for easier readability and then noticed this). One section states that there is *possible* untruth to the e-mails, while one states that there is evidence from a lawsuit settlement that these e-mails indeed were fraudulent. I have hidden the two sections for now. When you have further information, please undo my edit and correct the information. Thank you. 69.155.128.40 (talk) 17:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC), modified 17:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Classmates.com. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.ag.ny.gov/media_center/2010/aug/aug18a_10.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:54, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

badly out of date

The article is badly out of date, but I don't have the time or the stomach to fix it. The Memory Lane branding and style are gone. The aggressive emails remain, along with I don't know what else. I don't know whether the remodel includes a change of ownership, but that certainly needs to be checked.--Paleolith (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Browsing archive.org, it appears that the new design was rolled in gradually, but the Memory Lane part was gone by the second week of March, 2013.--Paleolith (talk) 21:15, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

yearbook photos

The yearbooks that can be found on classmates.com from before 1964 can be used to illustrate Wikipedia articles because under American copyright law they're public domain. I've written a bookmarklet that makes it easier to copy the high resolution sheet that you need to click after selecting a photo:

javascript:(function(){$('.extracted-image').html('<img src="'+$('.extracted-image').css('background-image').replace(/^.+?(http.+?\.jpg).+/,'$1')+'" width="400"/>');})();

I hope others find this useful--1Veertje (talk) 13:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Hard to read

This article is very confusing to read espeically for the "illegal practices". Shouldn't this be under "controversies"? Also appears to be a personal entry rather than an unbiased standpoint.

Vibrioidxire (talk) 01:08, 24 September 2023 (UTC)