Talk:Linus Torvalds
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | Subsurface (software) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 30 November 2020 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Linus Torvalds. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
| Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Linus Torvalds article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months  |
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Where is the controversy section?
This page doesn't even have a controversy section. Tovalds's public image isn't that great. There seem to be various pages made to documment Linus Torvalds controversy. There is a whole subreddit just devoted to rants by Linus. Semantism2 (talk) 01:02, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Semantism2, I agree that this article shouldn't shy away from (properly sourced) criticism or controversy.
- However, many people argue that a dedicated "controversy section" or a "criticism section" is unnecessary -- WP:CSECTION. Like them, I recommend integrating criticism (as well as praise) in specific sub-sections where they are relevant, and naming sub-sections using more specific titles than "controversy" or "criticism".
- --DavidCary (talk) 20:15, 29 September 2025 (UTC)