Talk:TradeKing

message: :Image:Tradeking logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Tradeking logo.gif

message: Hi, my name is Jude Stewart, and I’m director of online content at TradeKing. Among other responsibilities, I keep track of our TradeKing Wikipedia entry. I noted this discussion about whether the TradeKing entry should be considered spam and wanted to weigh in if I can.
First, though, I edited the entry to address some of the complaints so far. I removed the TradeKing logo and the link to one, positive TradeKing product review. The entry also includes a new “Product reviews and criticisms” section, which summarizes the chief advantages and disadvantages product reviewers have cited about TradeKing’s product offering and service. All references are cited to original source; we encourage Wikipedia participants to add others, good or bad. 
TradeKing emphasizes transparency and accountability in a real way. Since 2005 we’ve hosted an active social community of investors and traders, who interact with our CEO and senior staff on a daily basis. We welcome dialogue from clients or prospective clients, we hear both real-world criticisms and praise from them, and we try to respond to all of it out in the open. 
We think Web 2.0 holds amazing benefits for individual investors. Before this era, people were trading alone in their basements, learning from their own mistakes the hard way. Now traders can freely share information about trading strategies, learn from each others’ mistakes (the easier way), and keep each other informed as to which news sources, tools, and brokerage platforms offer the squarest and best deal. Wikipedia is an important collaborative resource in this new era. In fact, we started our Wikipedia entry to get a better grip on what investors are saying about us, and to improve our services accordingly.
We’re not a publicly-traded company like E*TRADE or TD Ameritrade, so we won’t make that argument for our continued presence on Wikipedia. But we are a public brand, much-discussed in the investing community. Not all of that discussion results in a new account for us, but all of it serves to better inform any investor who’s trying to decide if we’re the broker who should be trusted with their hard-earned money. 
In that spirit, we’d submit that the TradeKing entry on Wikipedia should stand. But if the group here  decides otherwise, of course we’ll respect that. 
Best,
Jude Stewart, Director of Online Content, http://www.tradeking.com
Joodferl (talk) 21:49, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Response from TradeKing