No, Lennart, it's 'Linux', not 'GNOME/Linux'. The most important contributions that the freedesktop.org
made to Linux were the creation of the GNOME and systemd. Those are fine and inspired products. systemd is a monumental achievement and has earned you, Lennart, and the Redhat countless kudos and much appreciation.
(An operating system) != (a desktop environment). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a desktop environment to make it easily usable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNOME/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the Redhat). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without GNOME whatsoever.
Next, even if we limit the GNOME/Linux title to the GNOME-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. GNU may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNOME contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called GNU/Linux? Or, at a minimum, GNOME/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it.
You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNOME code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing GNU code, GNU is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than GNU. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument.
Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNOME users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that systemd is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to systemd as 'the Linux init system'? Or at least, 'Linux systemd'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux?
Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, Lennart, the freedesktop.org, and Redhat have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag.
Thanks for listening.