User talk:Tgotchi

Re: Speedy Deletion
I deleted it for two reasons: first, it read like an advertisement or a brochure for the program. What the website/company does is important, but it should not make up the entire article. The company has its own website to tell us what it does. Second, it failed to assert any kind of notabilty. The article basically only stated that it exists. It was going to fail at articles for deletion for the same reasons. As far as the two links you provided goes, neither would qualify as a reliable source for Wikipedia's purposes, as the subject of your article was not the focus of either link, and both would qualify as a trivial mention in those articles. The WIRED story simply mentioned the IP2location.com once, while the MSDN link is a listing of ads for similar services. To qualify as a reliable source, IP2location.com should be the focus of the source you are providing.

Ideally, for a good article, there should be a brief mention of what the company does, with the majority comprising commentary about the company that is backed up by reliable sources. As examples, you could look at the articles on Hulu and Scrabulous and how they are sourced. Regards, Resolute 16:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I really appreciate your explanation. I have added more reference such as university research into the page.
 * The article I deleted was similar to article previously deleted. The article still was borderline spam and weak to no assertion of notability. If you wish to further dispute the deletion, you should look at deletion review. --Michael Greiner 18:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Ip2location.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Ip2location.gif. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 05:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)