Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StartCom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Corporate vanispamcruftisement. Speedy declined, contested prod. Speedy delete. MER-C 09:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if they can be added during the debate, but there is also

StartCom Enterprise Linux
StartCom MultiMedia EditionDGG 01:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Those are both redirects to StartCom Linux so there is no need to AfD them. (Requestion 02:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Response

Can we have this discussion on my user page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Startcom It would be in continuation of most previous entries. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Startcom (talk • contribs).

No, as we have a zero tolerance approach to corporate vanity and hence these articles need to disappear. Also, this discussion is centralised, as opposed to some far off corner of the wiki. MER-C 10:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Delete As corporate spam with multiple problems, including conflicts of interest and lack of sources. There is nothing to indicate the notability of the subject, either. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ speak ○ see ○ 13:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Delete as per nom, and as per user:Lankybugger. DES ^(talk) 16:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Subject lacks reliable, independent sources of information. No possible way to create an encyclopedia article. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 19:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Speedy Delete Lacks reliable due to COI not sure about neutrality WP:NPOV, seems to be original research WP:NOR.--Hu12 20:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Keep You are using phrases only, instead of pointing out a real problems, if there were any. There are three different articles and certainly none of your "arguments" points out even one concrete reference to one of them. This is not serious. Stop spaming the articles of StartCom!— Startcom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 20:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
Delete. I read through the story of the interaction with the Startcom company at User talk:Startcom. This company has had since December 2006 to get this straightened out, and they still haven't come up with reliable sources giving third-party opinions. Aren't there any Israeli magazines that have written about them? The bit about offering a cheaper certification seems like it should have got some press coverage, but I see nothing here. I think they aren't taking our policy seriously. Could it be a reading comprehension problem? It's time to delete the articles. EdJohnston 22:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Delete. I'd be more specific, but the COI SPA hasn't attended to the policies and guidelines previously cited, so why waste my (figurative) breath? — Athænara ✉ 22:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, perhaps you all should differentiate between the StartCom article an the entries about StartCom Linux and StartCom Certification Authority. I can understand, that information about StartCom "the company" isn't so exciting. However I don't think that this applies to the later two articles, which in my opinion have a place here. See also discussion pages of the two. — Startcom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 23:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC) (UTC).
Delete StartCom only. The other two articles have specific purposes and are notable. — CJewell (talk to me) 03:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Strong Keep for StartCom Certification Authority per Stpeter below.Keep for some version of these 3 articles. I don't know if that means merging all three, deleting 2, etc. I've spent 3 hours researching Startcom and it appears marginally notable -- see my detailed comments on the talk page: Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/StartCom. In particular, I find the c't and DistroWatch references compelling. I think notability is the issue for this AfD, not the fact that it was spammed, obnoxious as that might be. Also, I sense this company's notability is growing with time.--A. B. ^(talk) 16:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Comment. Even the article on StartCom Certification Authority, the most plausible of the three, has no reliable sources by my criteria. I agree that the c't article is interesting, but it's basically a warning against using StartCom certificates! And it's a web site. The mentions on the DistroWatch site, if you look at them, sound like multiple occurrences of the same press release. If one of the StartCom articles listed in this AfD is kept, where will editors go to find reliable material to update it, given that StartCom seems to get no notice in the regular press? I think that StartCom fails WP:CORP and it's so obscure that any article about it will be hard to maintain. EdJohnston 16:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

All Linux distributions have a reference to Distrowatch, since it's an important web site. Distrowatch indeed announces most - if not all - distribution releases. This is what they do. Obviously for someone familiar with the Linux world, not so for others perhaps. Startcom 17:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
StartCom has released so far about 7 operating systems, 1 failed (not released), about 10 update releases and a few release candidates (test versions). Startcom 17:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Strong Keep for StartCom Certification Authority. This certification authority (CA) is the root CA for the intermediate certification authority (ICA) run by the XMPP Standards Foundation at xmpp.net. This ICA has been issuing cost-free digital certificates to administrators of Jabber servers on the public Internet since December 2006. As of 2007-04-05, this ICA has issued several hundred certificates. It is helpful for server administrators to find information at Wikipedia about the StartCom Certification Authority as they decide whether to obtain such certificates. It is also helpful for developers of Jabber client software and Jabber server software to find that information as they decide whether to bundle the StartCom Certification Authority's root certificate with their software. This information is also helpful for end users of the relevant Jabber clients and deployed servers (e.g., the jabber.org server, which uses a digital certificate issued by the ICA, has over 220,000 registered users, many of whom may be interested in finding objective information about the StartCom Certification Authority. I strongly encourage retention of this article. Stpeter 18:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

According to his user page, Stpeter is Executive Director of the XMPP Standards Foundation. --A. B. ^(talk) 19:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

comment It still doesn't confer a license to spam even when it's true. Lets not forget, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising especially considering the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, and lack of Reliable Published Sources. Perhaps organizations such as yours, who use this CA, should contribute funds to better inform server administrators, developers and end users who may be interested in of StartCom's cost-free benefits. Notability and Neutrality are important objectives at Wikipedia, Promotional use of Wikipedia, unfortunatly is considered bad practice, even if well intended.--Hu12 20:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Objection

I don't understand! Lets go here one by one...

1.) The StartCom articles exist for quite some time now. They were build and guided by members of Wikipedia. The first entry was a stub which I took on to improve. Notability of StartCom Linux and CA were discussed previously (See discussion pages of each article) and have been found to satisfy the Wikipedia criteria and guidelines.

2.) For example StartCom Linux is mentioned at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Clones among other similar distributions, all of which have their own entry in Wikipedia. I quote: "include StartCom Enterprise Linux, CentOS, Pie Box Enterprise Linux, Scientific Linux, White Box Enterprise Linux and Lineox. Oracle Corporation has also recently come out with its own repackaging of Red Hat Enterprise Linux called Oracle Enterprise Linux as part of its Unbreakable Linux program but don't provide a free mechanism of applying updates without paying a service fee as with Red Hat." So what is the difference here? The same is true for this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_distributions Additionally you can find most Linux distributions here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions Most of them have their own entry in Wikipedia.

3.) The same goes for the StartCom Certification Authority. The StartCom CA is very unique in being the first and only CA providing free digital certification (for both server and client certs) and being included in some major browsers and other software. Also here, there are various CAs listed in Wikipedia.

4.) If you remove the StartCom articles you must remove almost any other Linux distribution listed here, the same goes for the CA.

I suspect, that you are related and/or sympathize with a competing Linux vendor which happens to support also a competing CA (and I can name names if you want)! StartCom is not Spam, how dare you say this! Additionally there is interest in these articles. Additionally StartCom Linux is 100 % open source and works with a community surrounding both the distribution and the certification authority. — Startcom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 17:22, April 4 2007 (UTC) (UTC).

Originally the StartCom Enterprise Linux was a stub. I didn't created it. I improved it. Somebody else can improve it further. Nothing more to say here. Startcom 09:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

Concerning notability, this is from the guidelines at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability

"Notability is generally permanent

If a topic has multiple independent reliable published sources, this is not changed by the frequency of coverage decreasing. Thus, if a topic once satisfied the primary notability criterion, it continues to satisfy it over time."

This is exactly what happened in the past and I'm very surprised to see this issue coming up again!

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:StartCom_Linux and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:StartCom_Certification_Authority — Startcom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 17:55, April 4 2007 (UTC) (UTC).

[edit] Differences

Can anybody tell me, what is the difference between http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StartCom_Linux ?— Startcom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 23:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

First of all - please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. This debate is only for the merits of these 3 articles. Responses to your points: The age of the articles is not considered as part of this debate - all articles must uphold WP:V and WP:N criteria at all times. These critera must also be upheld regardless of the existence of other distros in Wikiepdia. Again, read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Unique or not, the StartCom Certification Authority page must be sourced like all the others, and it definately fails WP:SPAM. Nobody here is is working for any other Linux distributions or other entities - our only goal is to maintain a reliable and respected encyclopedia. In addition, many of us are also part of the open source community that you benefit from. This is the first AfD for all of these articles - so the primary notability has not been established by consensus. If the articles do survive this process, then you can use that as precedent in future AfD discussions, but remember that consensus can change. Strong Delete StartCom and StartCom Certification Authority per WP:CORP but weak keep StartCom Linux due to very lose WP:SOFTWARE criteria. - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 04:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Concerning the StartCom CA, I suggest that somebody improves it. Merely deleting is unproductive and a waste. And I liked the phrase "that YOU are of the open source community from which I benefit"...that's great! Yes, this is the attitude here...— Startcom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 09:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_StartCom_4ac0.html"

Categories: AfD debates (Places and transportation) | AfD debates