Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NewStar CactuSoft Technologies

A search on CactuSoft +software gets only 2000 hits, not many for an Internet-based software company. I question relevance. Also, this page was involved in a recent bizzare and offensive vandalism of Template:In the news&mdash;what's going on with that? [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 20:30, 2004 Aug 13 (UTC)
 * It was not an offensive vandalism, as CactuSoft's Insight and Outlook publishes a list of notable webpages. Wikipedia's first appearance on this list was important to Wikipedia's history.  Please Keep.&mdash; [[User:33451|Mr. Grinch (Talk)]] 20:35, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * A search on "Cactusoft Insight and Outlook" returns 45 hits. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 20:36, 2004 Aug 13 (UTC)
 * The Insight and Outlook feature is under the name NewStar. To save you time, I have taken the Google test with "NewStar Insight and Outlook". &mdash; [[User:33451|Mr. Grinch (Talk)]] 20:46, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * 366 hits. Still nowhere near notable. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 20:47, 2004 Aug 13 (UTC)
 * Since when is Google the judge of notability? Not everything comes up on Google, you know. &mdash; [[User:33451|Mr. Grinch (Talk)]] 20:50, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, but rankings of websites by Internet-based companies tend to. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 20:52, 2004 Aug 13 (UTC)
 * The NewStar web server is coded so that it can not be indexed on Google, to prevent Googlebombing. If you are not finding the corporate site, that is why.  I know this as I work for CactuSoft. &mdash; [[User:33451|Mr. Grinch (Talk)]] 21:00, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I keep reading that comment over and over, trying to make sense of it. I can't. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 17:05, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Sadly NewStar "Insight and Outlook" 0 hits Rich Farmbrough 14:53, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * This seems fairly inoffensive. What's the problem? wikipedia is not paper 33451's appalling edits to the front page don't really relate to this page. Mr. Jones 20:41, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * My edits to the front page were justified, because, as I said, being listed on I&O is a large step forward for Wikipedia. &mdash; [[User:33451|Mr. Grinch (Talk)]] 20:46, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * It's nothing of the sort. CactuSoft is obscure, nevermind the bulletien it puts out. Including it in wikipedia is fine (IMO), but it's not front page material. Mr. Jones 21:16, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Does your opinion of CactuSoft have to do with the fact that it says Childlove movement is the most notable article in Wikipedia? &mdash; [[User:33451|Mr. Grinch (Talk)]] 21:20, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence that this is encyclopedic. It seems to be promotional material. And please, VfD is not a good place to discuss wider issues. It's long and controversial enough even if we stay focussed. Andrewa 21:31, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, I wouldn't say it's promotional...What determines whether or not a company can have an article? &mdash; [[User:33451|Mr. Grinch (Talk)]] 17:49, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * This is strange. There is a company called "CactuSoft" ( http://www.cactusoft.com ) but that doesn't seem to be related to this one, it's UK based for a start. The google test provided kindly by "Mr Grinch" lists a lot of sites which contains those three words. I find no evidence that this company exists, let alone notable. I call bullshit and for the deletion of this article. --Ianb 22:02, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Why does everyone think their hardly-notable company should have its own encyclopedia article? Household names only, please. Jeeves 22:08, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * NewStar CactuSoft gets ONE Google hit: . Delete.  RickK 23:42, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Looks like a non-notable delete to me. Hayford Peirce 00:41, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Zero hits for "CactuSoft Technologies". I really wanted to find a website for them, and tried all kinds of other combinations of the given names and info in the article (BTW "Ty's Software and HTML" also zero hits), but after 20-30 minutes of searching I gave up. Didn't find any news stories, or anything else that seemed related to this "company", either. Niteowlneils 04:18, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - can't prove existence, much less notability. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 06:28, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable. Make sure you delete the redirects at NewStar and CactuSoft as well.  --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:56, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)