Well would someone please tell me the "Standards".

Long ago, in a galaxy far, far away, there was a site called 'skinz.org' which instigated controls over wallpaper submissions in an attempt to control/limit the size of the Wallpaper section on what was/is specifically a skin site. Walls were seen as an adjunct to the skin sections, not the 'prime directive'.
The only way to limit, or moderate these wall submissions was to make a 'qualitative' judgement as to their 'uniqueness, innovation, or adept artistic skill'.
Blue Swirlies, lens-flares and other 'filter-frenzies' became the criteria for immediate rejection, unless there was a fantastically original slant on their use.
Now, with the plethora of 'XP' related submissions as well, critical mass can be reached, whereby there are just too many closely related walls and/or skins to justify inclusion on those grounds alone.
I clearly remember Shoggot at skinz copping a lot of flack from disgruntled artists, but ultimately it resulted in a quality collection of works.

So many sites exist specifically for walls and without any controls on uploads, and these are swamped by 'a lot of the same'.

Here, at WinCustomize, we are endeavouring to just raise the bar a little....

I don't think it's anything special, but I've certainly seen a lot worse that made it past moderation. Of course, quality is in the eye of the beholder.

Though personally speaking, I like good tileable (even if simple) wallpapers. What I get sick of seeing is fairly low quality renderings or wallpapers that look nearly just like 100 others. Just my 2 cents.

Exactly what I was about to say T-Man.

The wallpapers were not moderated until we realized that it was necessary. At first, everything submitted was accepted. We came to the conclusion there is no reason to host an enormous collection of wallpapers that will not be used on any desktops because they just don't have enough appeal. A bit of selective judgement is definitly called for here.

There are several moderators all of whom have a great deal of experience with digital artwork. Judging the aesthetic appeal of a submission is not intended to reflect the "taste" of the moderator, but rather an objective evaluation of the merit of the submission.

XPfreak - in your case it was me that moderated your submission. It would be impossible to give a full critical evaluation of every wallpaper that doesn't make it in. The term used in your email notice "moderated" means that it was not just because we are not accepting XP stuff at this time. It would not be fair to post my feelings about the work here unless you really wanted me to.

At this time, we are re-evaluating a lot of the work that has already been posted and attempting to bring the entire library up to a standard we can all feel good about. We are not an art gallery, and we do not hold such lofty standards before you. We do however, try to determine if the work is really your best effort and will it have a broad appeal as a desktop wallpaper.

Ultimately I would hope that anyone getting a "moderated" wallpaper notice would look at it as a challenge to try to reach farther and achieve a higher level of expression for themselves as well as the public they are sharing their work with.

Never give up because something didn't get accepted. Step back and look at it with a more critical eye, try to improve what you've done and send your next effort to us. Thus when your work is posted you will feel a greater sense of pride and accomplishment. But remember, we are not being all that difficult to get by either...

If you have a lot of submissions currently in the database and suddenly your work gets vastly better (that does happen) expect us to re-evaluate your previous work as well.

Thanks to all of you who send in your wallpapers. We truly appreciate the support and the spirit of sharing your work. I'd love to hear what you all feel about our efforts to provide a quality collection of wallpapers.

I really wish you guys would fix the URL parser. Here is is without the http:

scripts.wincustomize.com/preview2.asp?source=https://www.wincustomize.com/library/accounts/Frugus/wallpapers/DesktopX.jpg

Okay, here we go:

https://www.wincustomize.com/library/accounts/Frugus/wallpapers/DesktopX.jpg

Sorry for all the messages.

Tarkus - I'd like to decline to comment on that unless XPfreak really wants me to get specific in this forum about his piece. I will say however, I hadn't seen the one you linked to before but it has a nice layout for a desktop image. It's also in the enormously popular "blue" color

In most cases the moderators give a brief description of why a submission has been rejected. But due to the volume of new submissions that is received it is not feasable for them to give lengthy comments on each rejection. In theory it would be great if they did that, but realistically, it would consume too much of their time.

Crae, that is a very good reference. Very accurate.

I feel the reason why this wallpaper was rejected because many people have a dislike for xp-related items, I think most of my wallpapers are of high quality and I do try my best at my wallpapers even if the majority does not like it, there are still "xpfreaks" out there. I could understand if I ripped a wallpaper from xp and said it was mine, I have seen many xp related wallpapers here recently that are of lower quality and layout being accepted.

to bring up the point that most of my wallpapers have such low ratings it is because most people dont like the xp "genre".

Well said Jafo.