The result was delete. To the author and subject, our guidelines for notability are generally not satisfied by passing mentions in the media - articles should be directly focused on the subject if being used to satisfy WP:CORP. There are two links which were posted a couple of days ago and have not been discussed, but I don't feel that I'm compromising my summary with personal opinion by saying that both articles only make passing mentions of Enigma and are not sufficient to reverse the consensus for deletion here.
To reply to Royalguard, there is a backlog on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old at the moment, so few discussions are being closed after only the minimum five days. You can help out if you want - see Wikipedia:Deletion_process#Non-administrators_closing_discussions. --Sam Blanning(talk) 00:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Corporate vanity page of corporation that fails to satisfy WP:CORP. Valrith 19:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is User:enigmasoftwaregroup again. I have read all of your comments and your input has been educational. While this process has been a little frustrating. I cannot argue that the way Wikipedia is edited works very effectively. It is a great portal, and this has been quite a learning experience.
I have edited the article again. Being affiliated with the company it is impossible for me to have a Neutral Point of View. So in order to comply with that rule, I have reduced the entire article to a stub.
To answer Charles A.L.'s comment: This page is was never intended as an advertisemtent for the company. The reason I disclosed that I was affiliated earlier was to comply with Wikipedia guidelines. There are a lot of guidelines here and I am new just learning the rules. Now that I am more familiar with them I will make sure our company abides by them.
Now that the article should be compliant with NPOV. I think this page should stay as SpyHunter definitely meets the guidelines for a notable product. And Enigma as the author of a notable product should have a minimum of a stub
I feel that if the editors here determine that Enigma Software Group does not meet requirement 1 for a notable corporation from WP:CORP that the editors here must then rewrite WP:CORP guidelines. The guidelines of WP:CORP stated that listing shopping hours, or simply being in a directory did not count. There was nothing that said one or two sentences about the company didn't count, all stories ever written had to be positive, all editors had to like your product, or that talking about a companies products is not talking about a company.
More Press on the company
Here is another article from Red Herring Magazine http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:JIhEsENj3cgJ:redherring.com/Article.aspx%3Fa%3D11282%26hed%3DIE7%2Bdue%2Bthis%2Bsummer+redherring+%22enigma+software%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6
the link is in google cache. You need to login to read it directly.
Here is another article from Smart Computing Magazine
http://www.smartcomputing.com/editorial/article.asp?article=articles/2005/s1603/10s03/10s03.asp
All in total I think our company has been mentioned in publications well over 20 times in the last 3 years. Usually just a sentence or a paragraph some positive, some neutral, and some not so great.
Thank you all for your input and your patience with us.
Enigmasoftwaregroup 07:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]