Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EJBCA

EJBCA[edit]

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 Nomination withdrawn.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) Anton.bersh (talk) 18:55, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article reads as a specification of a technical product intended for advertisement for professionals. This software is not notable, as far as I see. Article has only 2 references, both from the project's site; in "further reading" only the first source actually covers EJBCA in detail, most other don't even mention it. Anton.bersh (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please note:

1. The article was created by Special:Contributions/ZeiZai6Y with the explicit intent of promoting this software. He wrote "Just announced to the community that it exists" on Talk:EJBCA.

2. Article was significantly expanded by multiple different accounts, who did not make meningful contributions to any other articles. These include Special:Contributions/David_CARELLA, Special:Contributions/83.226.9.171.

3. The article did not have any reliable third-party sources since its creation (which lead me to believe EJBCA was never notable, not just a victim of link rot).

I might be seing patterns which aren't there, but just wanted to share it with other users. Anton.bersh (talk) 14:46, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi - I'm the Product Owner of said product, and I was alerted about this article's nomination for deletion by a member of our user community. We have generally chosen to not edit this article ourselves precisely to avoid any accusations of advertising, that said I believe that the product is notable within the PKI sphere and worth keeping. To wit:

1 EJBCA has been mentioned in the news several times, most notably back in 2019 (https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/03/godaddy-apple-and-google-goof-results-in-1-million-misissued-certificates/ and https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/13/tls_cert_revoke_ejbca_config/ but also in 2018 (https://www.theregister.com/2018/08/07/cisco_vpn_certificate_expiry/).

2 The users of EJBCA mentioned in the article above should denote it as a notable software project

3 Other open source PKI projects with far smaller footprints still have articles, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCA and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DogTag

If it would be considered acceptable, we would be happy to improve the quality of the article according to the points stated and with the goal of making it informative for the public.

I proposed deltion of the article because it appeared to be neglected since circa 2016. Since this is no longer the case, I withdrew deletion nomination.

1 and 2. Great that you found more siurces, we can try to incorporate them into the article.

3. Each article is evaluated separately on its own merit, as far as I know. If you think OpenCA and DogTag are not notable, you are welcome to propose their deletion.

4. Please don't edit EJBCA directly, instead please propose changes to it on Talk:EJBCA. That way, other Wikipedia contributors without WP:COI can edit EJBCA and maintain artile objectivity. Anton.bersh (talk) 12:17, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I edited this page several times, and have contributed to several other pages on wikipedia. Disclosure, I am employed by the company that is the main (but not sole) contributor to the open source project.

"in "further reading" only the first source actually covers EJBCA in detail, most other don't even mention it". How was this conclusion was reached?

1 The forth reference "Secret sharing..." have a chapter discussing "Implementing certificate extensions on PKI software" which gives technical details about doing this in EJBCA.

2 The fifth reference "Building and managing..." from the SANS institute have a whole chapter about EJBCA, "3.3 Open source Certificate Authority".

3 The book references mention EJBCA, but you have to get the books to read it.

4 There is indeed one broken link, from KTH — Preceding unsigned comment added by Primetomas (talk • contribs) 10:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. EpicPupper 18:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw deletipn proposal because there is clearly some interest in improving this article and I want to give it a chance. I'd gladly work with User:Shellwood and User:EpicPupper if they are willing to put in the time and propose improvements on Talk:EJBCA. Please note: Talk:EJBCA mentions that this article has had these issues since 2016, hopefully we'll finally fix it. Anton.bersh (talk) 11:56, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Anton.bersh:, if you would like to withdraw this proposal, please follow the instructions listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#Procedure_for_non-administrator_close_(nominator_withdrawal). Please note that I will most likely re-nominate this article for deletion, based on a quick look from the article. The article looks non-notable, and in a non-neutral point of view. Cheers, EpicPupper 18:31, 17 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.