Talk:GCI (company)

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Alaska Mid‑importance

	Alaska portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alaska, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Alaska on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AlaskaWikipedia:WikiProject AlaskaTemplate:WikiProject AlaskaAlaska articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Communication or Communications?[edit]

Is the correct name of the company "General Communications Inc.", "General Communication Inc.", or "GCI Communication Corp."? And is there officially a comma before "Inc."?

According to whois gci.com:

  General Communications Inc.
  2550 Denali St.
  Anchorage, AK 99503
  US
  Domain Name: GCI.COM

Their web site (even in the About section) only refers to the company as "GCI".

Depending on the correct answer, either some edits need to be made to the page or a page name move (and redirect, please) need to be made. cluth 23:32, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be General Communication, Inc. See the documents on this page for multiple use of "communication", published by GCI: http://www.gci.com/about/2008newsreleases3.htm koolman2 (talk) 11:23, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on GCI (company). 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 {{dead link}} tag to https://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=cba47523e41f12f6c2cbd6ab03957de4&docnum=32&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzt-zSkAl&_md5=6b4e68d11e6207e60558cb223f8f19e1
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100505062052/http://www.gci.com:80/about/coover.htm to http://www.gci.com/about/coover.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. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 19:58, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

refimprove tag[edit]

I'm not seeing the issue here. This appears to have adequate references for an article its size. The exact issue should either be explained here here on the talk page, or ^{[citation needed]} tags added to the specifc disputed statements. If this is not done in a reasonable frame of time the tag can be removed (again). Beeblebrox (talk) 21:12, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would add that when it was added the article looked like this [1] so it is arguable that the problem was solved some time ago, and since no details were provided at the time, or when the removal of the tag was reverted just now it is hard to know what the objection is, if there really is one and this was not just a blind, drive-by reversion. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm talking to myself here, but after looking at the contribs of the user who reverted the tag it is clear they have been misapplying tags and making other inappropriate edits today, and ther was probably no thought whatsoever put into their re-adding of tags here, so I have removed it again. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:20, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on GCI (company). 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/20100505062052/http://www.gci.com/about/coover.htm to http://www.gci.com/about/coover.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. 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: 18 January 2022).

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) 23:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]