Template talk:Linux

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Linux template.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 120 days

Linux Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Archives (index)

Index 1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 120 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

I was thinking that maybe Lennart Poettering (systemd original and lead developer), Matthias Ettrich (original KDE developer), Miguel de Icaza (GNOME original developer), etc. belong in this list, after all this list certainly doesn't just list Linux kernel developers, it also lists developers of common software used by Linux distributions like GNU software. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 08:03, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that they belong. The only question is how to keep the list from getting too big? Perhaps we need to agree on an inclusion criteria? - Ahunt (talk) 17:32, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If "people who made software for Linux" is the qualification, you could arguably make a list of over 50 people here. Why isn't Stephen Tweedie listed, for instance? He made ext3! But then we run into another problem with this approach.... we'd end up with a list of over 50 people! Is this actually useful to readers in a way that Category:Linux people is not? If someone is interested in making an exhaustive list of people who have contributed to Linux in some way, that is better suited for an article, not a navbox.

This feeds into a more general consideration: editors should be extremely wary of creating open-ended lists based on arbitrary merits that are determined by themselves. A list of kernel contributors is both closed-ended and clearly non-controversial, because it is provable through reliable sources. A nav template of people broadly associated with Linux, however, is an open-ended list and invariably invites disagreement as to whether any given person (almost all of whom are still living) is "notable enough" to be included in what is effectively a top-level navigation element on Wikipedia. Because at some point you end up having to talk about people like Andy Rubin, who funded the creation of Android, the world's most widely-used implementation of Linux.... or Ken Coar, who was the directory of the Apache Foundation, the "A" in the famous "LAMP stack". And so it would go, on through dozens of people... Warren -talk- 04:57, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That was basically my concern, too. Even "a list of kernel contributors" would potentially include many thousands of people. We could limit it to lead devs or at least influential devs in some way, otherwise, yes, a cat would be a better way to handle that. - Ahunt (talk) 13:55, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We could have this template containing the bare minimum of people important to Linux (must admit I don't think any of the women listed in the template really belong there as if we loosen the criteria to include the groups these women belong to we'd probably have >100 people in the template) and have three dots after the list that wikilinks to that category of Linux people? Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 11:10, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I see with this "bare minimum" idea is that invariably future editors will want to add more people to that list because different people will have different ideas about what bare minimum means. We can all agree on Torvalds and Cox, I'm sure, but what about Perens or Shuttleworth or Maddog? If we left them out to meet a "bare minimum" criteria, eventually some IP-rando would come along and add them back because of "WP:N", and five years from now we'd end up having this conversation again.

I suggest we look to Template:Apple for a working example of what uncontroversial, closed-ended lists of people looks like -- Founders, board members, executives. Concise, stable, non-controversial. Of course, there are more notable "Apple people" than those narrow categories offer (Jef Raskin, Andy Hertzfeld, etc.), so there is a separate (IMO poorly-named) Template:Apple celeb nav template. If we did the same thing -- a separate template for people -- there would be space for lots of additional people that could be categorized by the type of contribution they've made. This would be easier on us as editors, and it would be a good step forward for readers. Warren -talk- 15:15, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

'tis a pity there's no like button for Wikipedia, as I do like your idea! Go right ahead as far as I'm concerned. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 15:59, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We may not have a button for "likes", but there is {{Like}} which displays as Like. Documentation. - Ahunt (talk) 16:47, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've created the template, Template:Linux people. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 07:26, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah!! Nice job, it looks great. Now we just need to figure out how we want to move forward with the Linux template. Warren -talk- 13:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good to me, too. Unless there is a reason not to, I think we can just remove the "people" section from Template:Linux and then just use both templates where appropriate. - Ahunt (talk) 19:17, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I whole-heartedly agree, I'll do it. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 04:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the box to all the articles listed on it, so I think this task is  Done. - Ahunt (talk) 15:31, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it would be good to have a link to DistroWatch in the template because it is useful and viable, unlike some things which are currently in the template. Just sayin'... 159.83.54.2 (talk) 03:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Thanks for bringing that up! - Ahunt (talk) 13:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

request for editing 2402:1980:81C4:6648:3D87:9832:2302:D12 (talk) 23:56, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As the template says "This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y"." You need to state exactly what you think should be changed so other editors can assess it and see if it should be changed or not. - Ahunt (talk) 00:39, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Could the "Phoronix" entry be removed here, since the article was deemed non-notable? --213.216.211.142 (talk) 16:52, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is a legitimate link to an actual article. Your edit history seems to show you are on some sort of vendetta against this subject. You should probably read WP:AXE. - Ahunt (talk) 17:08, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]