Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Efax


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was REDIRECT. Harro5 22:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Efax
non-notable company; advertising (ESkog)(Talk) 17:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Errr...they were one of the first companies, if not the first, to offer faxing via email. They're notable for that if nothing else. Keep and expand. You can call me Al 18:27, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Agree with You can call me Al -- j2 Global holds a registered trademark to this term, and so this is nothing but proper. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haynesj (talk • contribs)
 * Withdrawing nomination - verifiable claim to NOTABILITY found at EFax, and I have redirected this one there. (ESkog)(Talk) 21:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: This article (written by me) was once about a computer program called "efax" (all lowercase), but User:207.213.246.3 replaced it with spam content about "eFax" (uppercase F), which already has its own article at EFax. (Before I wrote the article about "efax", the article now at EFax was at Efax, so I moved it.) 207.213.246.3 is an IP address which belongs to j2 Global Communications, the company behind eFax. I have reverted it to the last edit by me. &mdash; A.M. 01:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I have restored the AfD notice on the page. Given the current content, I would change my vote to Delete and redirect to EFax. You can call me Al 14:23, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - this is a notable program. It's been around since 1995, is included in major Linux distributions (Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Mandriva, etc.), and appears to still be maintained upstream (there is a pre-release version available from as recent as August 2004 ). &mdash; A.M. 11:26, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually I was wrong about this; it's the latest version from the original author is only from 2000. However, there is a fork of efax with a GUI added, called efax-gtk, which is under active development. &mdash; A.M. 20:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC) A.M. 07:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

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)
 * There is already an article about j2 Global's eFax service (EFax), and this article links there. Creating multiple articles about the same subject is not allowed. &mdash; A.M. 11:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

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)
 * What do you mean "first"? The link to the eFax article is above the main text of the efax article. &mdash; A.M. 18:28, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * What I mean is that j2 has a trademark to efax, whether with a capital F or not. When someone types "efax" or "EFAX" in wikipedia it goes to this efax site, which I thought you first created. In any event, efax has a proud history, both with respect to the unix software and the eFax.com and eFax service of j2 Global today. I would hope we could agree to work together to develop an article helpful to the public in understanding this entire story.--207.213.246.3 23:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It would be possible to move the article to something like efax (software) and put a disambiguation page at efax which links to both eFax and efax (software). Would that be acceptable? However, the page shouldn't be moved until this AfD concludes. &mdash; A.M. 20:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * This idea makes a lot of sense. I think we'll be able to work this out. I don't know how the AfD process works, but I would imagine if we are the only two interested parties that our agreement would prevail. For now I suggest we include both of our respective entries in this location, and then j2's professional writers will come up with a draft for your review. How does that sound? --207.213.246.3 00:00, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This AfD listing will probably conclude in a few days, although it might be relisted because there haven't been many votes yet. If the article is kept, I will move it to efax (software) and put a disambiguation page (similar to this one) at efax. &mdash; A.M. 07:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.