Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fraud Resistant Electronic Voting

: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 delete. – Joe (talk) 20:20, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

=[[:Fraud Resistant Electronic Voting]]=

:{{la|Fraud Resistant Electronic Voting}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fraud_Resistant_Electronic_Voting Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Fraud Resistant Electronic Voting}})

This article is basically a personal essay, exemplified by the fact that the author originally referred to themselves in the first person, before replacing "I" with "we" (which isn't much better). Prod removed by said author without a rationale. Number 5 7 20:37, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Wikipedia is not a place for essays, spefifically those that aren't for the Wikipedia or user namespace. Kirbanzo (talk) 00:24, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Delete this essay. If someone wanted, they could write an article about Electronic voting fraud, with sources like [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/21/magazine/the-myth-of-the-hacker-proof-voting-machine.html this]. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 12:29, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Delete - The subject is notable but the article would need to be completely rewritten if an article of this title were to be retained. It could be moved to draftspace, but I doubt the creator, a single issue editor, would want to rewrite it in encyclopedic style. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Delete This simply isn't an encyclopedia article. Cwmhiraeth is correct; the subject in general has notability, but this is a manual. Even the author essentially confirms it is a manual, saying it "is much like high level requirements document".[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ANumber_57&type=revision&diff=858841413&oldid=858808661] He again confirms this (see talk page of the article where he says "this article satisfies criteria to be a high level system requirements document". I concur. It does. That doesn't make it an encyclopedia article. . Wikipedia isn't a hosting service for requirements documents. You wouldn't expect a dictionary to have a manual on car repair in it. Neither should we expect an encyclopedia to host a requirements document. We are not a place for instruction manuals. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

: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.