The result was delete. No assertion or evidence of notability. Sources are few and poor quality press releases. SilkTork ✔Tea time 09:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC) reply
This is an old article that's been marked for notability for a long time. Googling for it doesn't reveal very much recent, most of it seems to be an unrelated desktop wallpaper. The original sources don't seem to indicate sufficient notability either. The desktoplinux.com blurb (labeled as eweek) is really just an announcement from the project, and the slashdot post is the same. The only real review is the arstechnica article. It's a fine project, but I'm not sure it meets notability criteria. However I didn't want to prod it without review. Shadowjams ( talk) 02:28, 11 February 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. No assertion or evidence of notability. Sources are few and poor quality press releases. SilkTork ✔Tea time 09:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC) reply
This is an old article that's been marked for notability for a long time. Googling for it doesn't reveal very much recent, most of it seems to be an unrelated desktop wallpaper. The original sources don't seem to indicate sufficient notability either. The desktoplinux.com blurb (labeled as eweek) is really just an announcement from the project, and the slashdot post is the same. The only real review is the arstechnica article. It's a fine project, but I'm not sure it meets notability criteria. However I didn't want to prod it without review. Shadowjams ( talk) 02:28, 11 February 2012 (UTC) reply