I dont have a strong opinion about how much COI and promotion is in the ACiD article  I wouldnt have thought to challenge it because Ive heard of ACiD I ran a BBS in the early s and was briefly involved with Tribe   One decent indicator of consensus on notability is a long history of constructive edits Many different people have worked on the ACiD article since    Its possible that most of those edits came from people with COI issues though its not likely and probably not worth a lot of time to smoke out   One thing you can do that is constructive and may balance the coverage is to find places in the ACiD article that arent wellsourced You can tag those with fact inline Be careful because COI applies to you in the ACiD article as well  As for Evoke if you can provide reliable sources that back up an assertion of notability an article about it is likely to survive But be careful because the argument that Evoke is just like ACiD and ACiD has an article argument is specifically not valid see WPOTHERSTUFF   When I said tripped sensors I was just being colorful Im suggesting that whoever AfDd your article may not have known anything about you but rather just got set off by the tone of the article  Bruce Schneier has enough publicity as it stands