The result of the debate was REDIRECT. Harro 5 22:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable company; advertising (
ESkog)(
Talk)
17:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
reply
It seems to me that j2 Global and Ed Casas should discuss this issue and agree to work together to craft a meaningful entry for this term. -- 71.105.109.113 04:56, 28 December 2005 (UTC) reply
But you created that article and made the efax unix program first. j2's first trademark to eFax goes back to 1989 and it is very well known. Why shouldn't the description of j2's eFax go first? If not that, then the parties should draft something together that they can both live with. I believe j2 would work with you A.M. to do this.-- 207.213.246.3 17:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was REDIRECT. Harro 5 22:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC) reply
non-notable company; advertising (
ESkog)(
Talk)
17:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
reply
It seems to me that j2 Global and Ed Casas should discuss this issue and agree to work together to craft a meaningful entry for this term. -- 71.105.109.113 04:56, 28 December 2005 (UTC) reply
But you created that article and made the efax unix program first. j2's first trademark to eFax goes back to 1989 and it is very well known. Why shouldn't the description of j2's eFax go first? If not that, then the parties should draft something together that they can both live with. I believe j2 would work with you A.M. to do this.-- 207.213.246.3 17:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC) reply