Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linux Lite

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 keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Linux Lite

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

The topic of this article lacks notability as it fails WP:PRODUCT. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:46, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 03:33, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 03:34, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as currently questionable for the applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 03:54, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - tagged for notability since September. No improvmt. Staszek Lem (talk) 04:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Moderate Keep The front page of the official website for the software did actually show an 9/10 independent review from the magazine Linux Format, and this search did find a couple more reliable sources about the program, so I guess this is a somewhat notable topic. edtiorEهեইдအီးËეεઈדוארई電子ಇអ៊ី전자ഇī😎 21:09, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.
1. Noyes, Katherine (2012-10-26). "For a beginner-friendly distro, try Linux Lite 1.0.0". PC World. Archived from the original on 2016-02-12. Retrieved 2016-02-12.
2. Stahie, Silviu (2012-10-29). "Linux Lite 1.0.0 Amethyst, a Fast Distro for the Masses [Screenshot Tour]". Softpedia. Archived from the original on 2016-02-12. Retrieved 2016-02-12.
3. Germain, Jack M. (2013-10-24). "Linux Lite Is Heavy on Features and Usability". Linux Insider. Archived from the original on 2016-02-12. Retrieved 2016-02-12.
4. Nestor, Marius (2016-02-01). "Linux Lite Editor's Review". Softpedia. Archived from the original on 2016-02-12. Retrieved 2016-02-12.
  The review notes:
  
  Linux Lite is an open source and freely distributed operating system based on the popular and highly acclaimed Ubuntu Linux distribution, but using the lightweight Xfce as its default desktop environment.
  ...
  Summing up, Linux Lite is a really great, stable, productive and beautifully crafted Ubuntu-based operating system that can turn old and semi-old computers into powerful and modern workstations, replacing that deprecated Windows XP system.
5. María López, José (2012-11-28). "Linux Lite: Linux amigable y ágil" (in Spanish). Top Ten Reviews (Purch). Archived from the original on 2016-02-12. Retrieved 2016-02-12.
  The article notes:
  
  Linux Lite es una distribución Linux basada en Ubuntu que se caracteriza principalmente por su facilidad de uso y por ofrecer un buen rendimiento con poco consumo de recursos, gracias sobre todo a su Escritorio XFCE.
  En Linux Lite encontrarás un sistema operativo Linux totalmente operativo ejecutable directamente desde CD e instalable con ayuda de un práctico instalador, además de contar con el navegador web Firefox, la suite ofimática LibreOffice y el Escritorio XFCE, sencillo y fácilmente configurable.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Linux Lite to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 06:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 13:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Cunard's sources look good to me. Also, this review from Chip and a release announcement from InfoWorld. It's not Ubuntu, but it's got enough coverage that we should keep it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:16, 14 February 2016 (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.