Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QuoVadis

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 delete. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 20:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

QuoVadis

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

Non-notable company. Any coverage I can find is either pretty much incidental, a recycled press release, or applies to its recent acquistion. Shritwod (talk) 13:25, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: QuoVadis is a notable company for the following reasons: i) it is one of the leading providers of managed PKI in the world, and one of the top dozen suppliers of TLS/SSL certificates providing website security that is visible in the browser UI for many prominent university systems, national governments, and multinational corporations (see 2015 market share from Netcraft https://www.netcraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/assurance_breakdown.png), ii) it is a well-known Qualified trust service provider in Europe issuing eID credentials under eIDAS, including PKIoverheid in Holland and SuisseID in Switzerland, and iii) is a vocal participant in discussions affecting internet standards public key infrastructure including the CA/Browser Forum and the Mozilla discussion groups. The certificate authority sector has been turbulent and this company has maintained consistent presence, especially as the role of CAs becomes increasingly important in efforts to "encrypt everything" on the Internet. All of the above cause users to seek independent information about the company from sources such as Wikipedia. The page has existed for years without challenge. If this company is non-notable then certainly most of the pages in the "certificate authorities" category Category:Certificate authorities have similar standing. Cryptoki (talk) 14:41, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found this [1] PC Mag article about QuoVadis (not much substantial) and few passing mentions in usual tech sources. Reasons stated above by Cryptoki are (at least for me) too weak, I´m leaning to delete. Pavlor (talk) 09:24, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'd suggest a merge to holding company, but it got deleted too: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WISeKey. Regarding Cryptoki's arguments: 1) - uncited personal opinion (who says they are the biggest?). 2) ditto, who says they are well-known? It seems to fail GNG and NCORP. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:21, 17 May 2017 (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.