I don't really think this is a good argument given some of the things there are pages for. There is a wiki page for Yahoo Seach as well as one for Google Search. These are for the search engine websites themselves only, not for yahoo or google as a whole; the corporations themselves have separate wikipedia page.

If the basic google web search (containing A logo, search box, two buttons, and little else) warrants a dedicated wikipedia page, why not CD?

I mean, are you worried we're going to fill up wikipedia?

You are treating Wikipedia like a traditional encyclopedia, which it is not. In your original post you stated that we did not have the "quality info that surmounts to the necessity of a wiki page." My response was to provide what was by no means an exhaustive list of prospective subjects which could be enumerated upon, which even on its own far exceeds the minimum content requirements to establish a Wiki page.

I never claimed that a CD wiki page would be incredibly useful, nor even that the effort put into making it would yield an equitable return upon the effort. I was purely refuting your claim that there is insufficient information to establish a wiki page, which is empirically incorrect. Notably, a significant number of wiki pages fail to return upon the initial investment of effort... yet they sill exist.

Oh. Oh... I get it. The wording in your OP confused me; you were not discussing the requirements of a wiki page, but rather the lack of a need to create a wiki page to begin with. Disregard the above.