Is there a defined way to deal with this issue? Can somebody make the change
with a link to that defined way? It's hard to argue 'troll' when your linking
to wikipedia's own rules and procedures for dealing with this. And what if we
started a discussion page and all pitched in? It is obviously wrong that
there is a general agreement on this issue. One of the leading distributions
is called Debian GNU/Linux. One of the longest running leaders of the free
software movement (RMS) and the free software foundation disagrees. In fact
the only people who seem to really be in consensus (to some degree) are media
outlets (but even there not all using Linux, as RMS only speaks to those who
refer to it as GNU/Linux), non-technical users, and 'open source' proponents.
While this may make up a greater group it is far from a resolved issue given
Debian, Trisquel, Parabola, the FSF, RMS, and free software advocates, some
stores (ThinkPenguin), user groups, some writers/papers at times amongst
others use GNU/Linux.
- [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia adel . afzal
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia TralfamadorianOrator
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia mikko . viinamaki
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia Andrew R .
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia adel . afzal
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipe... chris
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wi... Andrew R .
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia swrnjtbs
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia onpon4
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia onpon4
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia icarolongo
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia lloyd
- Re: [Trisquel-users] GNU-Linux on Wikipedia onpon4
