There are documents written in the past and in our previous forms (examples referenced in the article) but as Apollo Systems has only gone commercial with the new technology in the past few months it's really only been in trade journals that are regurgitated versions of our press release.  So yes, we've appeared in publications, but what I understand Wikipedia is looking for is  third party and peer review.  Barring that, is acceptance within a notable agency (i.e. The U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing) a next best alternative?  I think so.  Also, scope, I agree, is critical to what is posted and why...  And I see where my article needs to address our capabilities and educate.  Validating this approach, though, is complicated by conflict of interest and the availability of third-party resources and review.  What I am going to do at this point is step back, approach my PHDs on staff and dig deeper for those documents.  (By the way, I've gained a tremendous confidence in Wikipedia since starting this process.)