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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) EpicPupper 20:36, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

EJBCA[edit]

EJBCA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

As noted in cleanup tags on the article, this article has multiple issues; there are no reliable sources (all lead to the product's website/documentation), the article uses second person inappropriately, and a slew of other issues. I re-nominated this as the previous AFD did not include any votes (only comments), and WP:CONSENSUS was not reached (withdrawn by nominator). EpicPupper 19:52, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 19:52, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 19:52, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. As a founder of this open source project, I think some of these issues are caused by my ignorance of the WP:COIN. Now better educated, is it appropriate for me to suggest edits, in the Talk page, to improve the article? (and suggest reverting some of my own edits)

@Primetomas: You may suggest edits to the article via the process listed at WP:ER. If you wish to revert one of your edits, that is generally permissible, however, you should not revert an edit just because of a conflict of interest. Please note that unless there are significant fixes to the issues outlined in the template located on the article, this AFD will remain. EpicPupper 04:29, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: AfD is a process in which editors form a consensus about the status of an article. Consensus on Wikipedia cares more about discussion and compromise over "voting". Simply put, AfD is not a vote process.

Additionally, AfD is not the process in which articles with clean up tags get resolved. AfD only cares about sources and notability.

Looking at the sources from the first nomination, the article seems to barely attain notability. Keep this article. JackFromReedsburg (talk | contribs) 04:57, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the guidance, I will keep that in mind next time. Withdrawing as nominator, looking to improve the article as an alternative to deletion. EpicPupper 20:36, 18 April 2021 (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.