Deletion of SharkSSL

Comment: Well, here's an "unbiased" editor, such as Sorisen demands, and I find his arguments unpersuasive.  He would be better served adding |reliable sources conferring the significant coverage ''about the subject''  requires to the article, devoid of promotional/press release content explicitly debarred by the relevant guidelines, instead of mudslinging and ''ad hominem'' attacks, a standard tactic of editors lacking substantive arguments.  (Honestly, does ''anyone'' glare at his terminal and think, "I have found a random editor, and despite knowing nothing about him and never having had dealings with him before, I somehow must hate him and wish him ill!  Death to his articles!")  I could find no such sources myself
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG)

Comment: This is a very clear delete. When evaluating software, we tend to look for high quality  and over here, there are clearly few. All the supposed RS turn out to be press releases. I also look at popularity of software and it is very clear that this is far from popular. Popular softwares can be identified from wide coverage and numerous discussions online. Clearly there are few here. In addition, the massive COI and disruptive editing is troubling. Delete as fails GNG and also 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NOTPROMO)