Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GeoTrust

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. In particular, Dyork, if you want a copy of the page in your userspace to work on, let me know. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:57, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GeoTrust[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Corporate spam sourced to primary sources, routine announcements and interviews. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:14, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 04:19, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ~ Amkgp 💬 05:21, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. This article has reference from Reuters, Theregister, Boston Business Journal, Computerworld, InternetNews, Atlanta Business Journal, Red Herring among others. Theregister article also outlines an important dispute on authentication process for SSL certificates on the Internet that provides the lock symbol on every browser for secure transaction. GeoTrust started the Domain-validated certificate method that is now used to distribute the majority SSL certificates on the Internet today through Let's Encrypt and current GeoTrust brand. If it were to be merged, It would need to be merged with Digicert. All the articles around SSL/ TLS need improvement, this one needs improved citations, but there appears enough to add.

Some sources for reference

Liana B., Baker (2017-08-02). "Symantec to sell Web certificates business to Thoma Bravo: sources".

"There's certs and certs – VeriSign badmouths rivals". 2002-07-24.

"VeriSign buys Cert Rival for $125M". 2006-05-18.

Joyce., Erin (2006-03-06). "GeoTrust CEO".

"GeoTrust Acquires Equifax Certificate Business". 2001-09-24.

>

"Mass High Tech, ACG name top Tech Dealmakers for 2007". 2006-05-18.

US Granted 8028162, Douglas D. Beattie & Christopher T. M. Bailey, "Methods and systems for automated authentication, processing and issuance of digital certificates", published September 27, 2011, assigned to GeoTrust }}

~~(talk) 19:46, 21 June 2020 (UTC)PKIhistory (talk) 11:56, 22 June 2020 (UTC)~~[reply]
*Keep: Stuff that relates to root trust certificates and companies doing it is pretty significant.Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/Merge: GeoTrust is notable in being a pioneer in using domain-validated (DV) certificates, which I see as important in the history of leading to where we are today with TLS/SSL. I think this article should continue to exist to help people understand how we got to where we are with certificate authorities. I do agree the article could use some improvement and see some of the sources mentioned above as potentially useful. I indicated Merge at the beginning because I do see that Geotrust's website now says "powered by digicert". If we can determine the publicly stated intent is to merge the two companies, then it may make sense to have GeoTrust redirect to DigiCert and to incorporate some of the relevant history into the DigiCert page. I have not researched it enough to be able to make the determination right now, but I would suggest that for the moment the GeoTrust page is kept. - Dyork (talk) 01:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 20:07, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note I originally closed this as keep since there appeared to be consensus and there were sources cited, but really that was me being careless and not taking a second to check. All of the sources are WP:ROUTINE (x company was bought by y, ...) or WP:PRIMARY (a patent application). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:01, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Technical relist following re-opening by RandomCanadian. ~~Admins only to handle relist/close from this point.~~ Thankyou.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Invalid "requirement" struck. Primefac (talk) 16:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment: Certificate providers typically will get WP:RS sources from reviews over the years: [1] and [2] to pick a couple online.Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:04, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As noted in my previous comment above, I believe that "GeoTrust" is important to the history of TLS/SSL and the article should be kept or potentially merged into DigiCert. I would ask that the page not be deleted so that better sources can be added - or a decision made about merging and appropriate text is incorporated into DigiCert. (I personally think it makes more sense as a separate page, but I'm open to the merge.) - Dyork (talk) 01:29, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.