Talk:Email filtering
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Article to-do list
[edit]Sections
[edit]Uses
[edit]- Autoresponders, out of office, vacation
- Mailing lists
- Meta, categories, flags
- Spam, junk mail, trash can
- Viruses, attachments
Technology overview
[edit]- Algorithms
- Intuitiveness
Server-side technology
[edit]- Exchange server
- Perl
- Webmail
Client-side technology
[edit]- AVG
- Microsoft Outlook (and Express)
- Norton
- Thunderbird
Client/Server Interaction
[edit]- SpamCoach, etc.
- spamc/spamd —Preceding unsigned comment added by KitchM (talk • contribs) 21:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Service providers
[edit]- GMail
- Hotmail
- Yahoo!
- Started by –– Constafrequent (talk page) 07:51, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Notes
[edit]- Page has been moved to Email filtering, without the hyphen in "e-mail", to represent the most common spelling.
- I've been advised about Mail filter. Will consider merging articles.
–– Constafrequent (talk page) 12:14, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was move. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 01:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Requested move
[edit]Email filtering → E-mail filtering – While it may not be the most common usage, e-mail with a hyphen is used on all other Wikipedia articles with the word in the title, like e-mail, chain e-mail, disposable e-mail address, e-mail attachment, e-mail authentication, e-mail bomb, e-mail client, e-mail hosting service, e-mail marketing, e-mail privacy, e-mail spoofing, e-mail tracking, shotgun e-mail and WYSIWYG e-mail. Note: I moved email tracking to e-mail tracking today based upon precedent. It was the only article I could find that did not use "e-mail". A move request was unnecessary since e-mail tracking was not an article or redirect. -- Kjkolb 11:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Survey
[edit]- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support as hyphen is preferred in formal writing and to standardize w/ existing. --Dhartung | Talk 03:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Support per nom and Dhartung. (I assume this survey is more of a formality due to the #Notes section from Dec 2004, just above). --Quiddity 04:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Support. Constafrequent is/was insane. The hyphenated version is by far more common. (Yes, I know this is uncivil and POV, but it's still valid.) Morgan Wick 02:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
- Support. It would have been nice if Constafrequent had doen this as a requested move, to open up for discussion and concensus, but we can always move it back :) -- Ratarsed 15:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]- Add any additional comments
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Companion pages
[edit]Articles Anti-spam techniques (users), Anti-spam techniques and Email Authentication provide the details of mail filtering. An idea for further improvement and redesign (see Talk:Anti-spam techniques#The 2012 merging proposal (server + users)) envisages four parts:
- an overarching one with lots of theory and explanation of mail headers and authentication and so on without being biased towards what might happen at the ISP level,
- a part from the users' perspective (possibly named something like "spam recognition and trapping") dealing specifically what mail clients and users see,
- another on spam filtering and blacklisting at the receiving mail server/ISP end, and
- another on protocols/laws/history of what mail servers may allow to pass/relay (and international laws/conventions as to what steps they might take at a system level to vet what may pass)
This page seems to me the best candidate for the first entry, Anti-spam techniques (users) for the second, while the two other articles, together, give a fairly good account of the third argument.
ale (talk) 17:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
"Content filtering - Spam" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Content filtering - Spam and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 19#Content filtering - Spam until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Stub-Class Computing articles
- Unknown-importance Computing articles
- Stub-Class Computer networking articles
- Unknown-importance Computer networking articles
- Stub-Class Computer networking articles of Unknown-importance
- All Computer networking articles
- Stub-Class software articles
- Unknown-importance software articles
- Stub-Class software articles of Unknown-importance
- All Software articles
- Automatically assessed Computing articles
- All Computing articles