Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/StartCom

message: Closely related to these articles are the following images:
*:Image:Screenshot-98.png
**links appear on talk pages but the image itself is not used
*:Image:Screenshot-51.jpg
**orphan
*:Image:Screenshot-96.jpg
**orphan
*:Image:Screenshot-92.png
**orphan
*:Image:Screenshot-91.png
**orphan
*:Image:Screenshot-18.jpg
**orphan
*:Image:Screenshot-19.jpg
**orphan
*:Image:Startcom-logo.jpg
**links appear on talk pages but the image itself is not used
*:Image:Screenshot-93.png
**orphan
--A. B. (talk) 13:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just nominated all for deletion as orphans except for :Image talk:Screenshot-51.jpg, which is overdue for automatic deletion due to copyright issues. See Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 April 17. --A. B. (talk) 23:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: *  has seriously cluttered the Afd page.  Can most of this coi spa's obfuscation be moved to the discussion page here so that the primary policies and guidelines issues will not be obscured there?    — Athænara </font>  ✉  23:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I agree with this.--Hu12 00:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title:  coi spa clutter on afd 

message: 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. — Preceding unsigned comment 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)
thread_title:  Response 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Objection 

message: "The volume of corporate vanity/vandalism which is showing up on Wikipedia is overwhelming.
"At the office, we are receiving dozens of phone calls per week from non-notable but self-aggrandizing authors screaming bloody murder about company, organization, and marketing edits which are reverted.  This is as it should be.  However, I am issuing a call to arms to the community to act in a much more draconian fashion in response to corporate self-editing and vanity page creation.  This is simply out of hand, and we need your help.
"We are the #14 website in the world.  We are a big target.  If we are to remain true to our encyclopedic mission, this kind of nonsense cannot be tolerated.  This means the administrators and new page patrol need to be clear when they see new usernames and page creation which are blatantly commercial: shoot on sight. …
"Some of you might think regular policy and VfD is the way to go.  I am here to tell you it is not enough.  We are losing the battle for encyclopedic content in favor of people intent on hijacking Wikipedia for their own memes.  This scourge is a serious waste of time and energy.  We must put a stop to this now.
"Thank you for your help."  — As posted by Brad Patrick on September 29, 2006.
Contributed with respect to the legitimacy of the encyclopedia by  — Athænara </font>  ✉  01:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corporate Vanity