Talk:Comodo Cybersecurity

This article reads like an advert

Is it standard practice for a Wiki article to list all the various products a company offers? This article seems more like an advert than an encyclopaedic entry (although some improvements were made recently). What does everyone think? LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Well I have removed quite a lot of text from this article now. I don't think it's appropriate to list all Comodo products here (Comodo is not like other companies such as Unilever, for example, that offer several products/brands under different names, so I don't see any encyclopaedic need to have them listed here - it's a blatant advert as far as I can tell). I have also removed other 'adverty' text such as the entire section dedicated to telling the story of someone who reported a bug and Comodo responded quickly with a fix ("Hey, look at our company and see how quick we are to respond to security issues that are reported to us!"). I'm guessing the majority of this article was written by someone with an affiliation to Comodo. Other thoughts on the matter are welcome! LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 12:14, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I have removed more sections as they are not really relevant to an encyclopedia entry on the subject, in my view. In fact, they seem to have been inserted purely for PR. Other thoughts are welcome! LoveEverybodyUnconditionally (talk) 10:51, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Talk Archive Page 1 Created

To make this Talk page easier to understand, I have used H:ARC to move all older discussions except the one above to this archive page: Talk:Comodo_Cybersecurity/Archive_1 - Dyork (talk) 16:13, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

After acquisitions/changes, page needs to be split into 3 pages

This page appears to be trying to be three different pages in one place:

• Comodo_Cybersecurity - one of the companies
• Comodo Group (redirect) - the overall company owning Comodo Cybersecurity
• Sectigo (redirect) - the separate company that was previously "Commodo CA" and, as mentioned in this article, was sold to investors in 2017 and re-branded to "Sectigo" in 2018.

It seems to me that at the very least Sectigo should be spun out into its own page. Currently Sectigo redirects to THIS page, which is really for a completely different company. I don't have time to work on this today, but would suggest this is something someone should take on at some point in time. - Dyork (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Quizbizet: - I saw your edit to the TLS page to point "Sectigo" to their website instead of tho this page about Comodo Cybersecurity. That change was reverted by @MrOllie: but I understand WHY you were making the change. As I note above, this page about Comodo_Cybersecurity really needs to be split out, and Sectigo needs its own page. Recently @PKIhistory: and I have been trading messages about this and PKIhistory is, I believe, going to work on a draft that would be available for comment. All this is a long way of saying that at some point soon there may in fact be a separate page for Sectigo that could be linked to. - Dyork (talk) 00:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I will update in a few days. I need to work the draft and make sure it is in good shape. I appreciate feedback and will post here when ready.PKIhistory (talk) 01:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Quizbizet:@Dyork:I updated the stub article on Sectigo in my sandbox for your review. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PKIhistory/sandbox I actually think that Sectigo is the only notable part of the Comodo history and the rest of the remaining company is small compared to their SSL business which was sold. Anyway, that is up for debate, but would be good to get Sectigo started with its own page. I look forward to your feedback. The previous article was rejected (I had no connection with it, but it had some valuable content).PKIhistory (talk) 23:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

When you have a chance, can you look at Sectigo draft in my sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PKIhistory/sandbox. Thanks.PKIhistory (talk) 12:53, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@PKIhistory: The draft looks good for a stub. One detail is that the "Type" in the Infobox needs to be from the list in List_of_legal_entity_types_by_country. The field is for the type of legal entity that it is, rather than what the main business is. - Dyork (talk) 20:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@Dyork:Thank you - fixed it. I will submit it soon. Will post on this page once submitted.PKIhistory (talk) 13:38, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

It is submitted, hopefully it is submitted correctly. When you have a chance, please take a look to see if submitted correctly.PKIhistory (talk) 17:55, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

It appears to be submitted properly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sectigo_(2)PKIhistory (talk) 20:17, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Ia m looking for help on Sectigo draft. I am trying to get it published. I would appreciate anyone's help editing it with me. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sectigo_(2)PKIhistory (talk) 12:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

• @PKIhistory: - Ugh... my apologies. Somehow I never noticed your request for help *two years ago*. I'll blame the pandemic. :-) And I see that your Sectigo draft was deleted because of the lack of any editing. I do think this is still worth separating out, because it is a different company. I guess we now have to request the draft to be restored. - Dyork (talk) 11:23, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

  That would be great for it to be restored. It is a separate company for awhile now and it deserves having its own page. I gave up on editing for some time but may come back. I can work on the draft is it is restored. It was good enough I think for publishing. PKIhistory (talk) 03:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

new name?

It's written Xcitium is the new name, but both Comodo and Xcitium websites function. Not sure if it's legit to rename the page. KyoNa at N (talk) 11:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)