Talk:History of the World Wide Web/Archive 1

=Topics from 2006=

Error
No mention of the first use of the term. Spring 1988 Washington D.C. by an unknown college student in a meeting with government technology officials. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.101.204 (talk) 13:27, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Scope
I want to thank Wackymacs for an excellent start here, but I'm a bit concerned about the scope... we can pull in a lot of info on the evolution of browsers, search engines, etc... but that's primarily about technology. I have an interest in documenting the growth in sites and culture, from high-energy physicists to college kids and comp-sci students to everyone. It's quite possible that this article should split out into separate histories for History of World Wide Web technology and History of World Wide Web culture. Just a thought, open to suggestions... KWH 06:56, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that in an article like this one, we definitely want to have a  lot on the culture of the Web. I also think it's important at the beginning of the article to make clear the point that when the Web was starting out, it  was only one of a number of competing Internet interfaces.  Until months after  Mosaic was  introduced,  the WWW was  just one of several interesting new technologies  which  were changing the earlier text-based Internet. I've started doing some work to clarify this. Just stating "The WWW is not the Internet." will not  convey this to somebody who started using the Internet after the  year 1995 or so, or to anyone else who never used Gopher,WAIS, Archie, or even FTP. CGMullin 20:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Clarification on hypertext
I've just edited the second paragraph of the 1992—2000: Growth of the WWW  section, since  it seemed worthwhile clarifying that  the Gopher protocol  is, in fact, hypertext. It's just not the sort of hypertext we are used to these days. A single Gopher menu item might refer to anything from a few words to a huge collection of documents, as with the hypertext links we are used to. Furthermore, that menu item, or link,  might look entirely different in two different Gophers, or in the *same Gopher*  at two different times, or  even in two places in the same Gopher at the same time. To me, it's that latter point which makes it clear that a Gopher menu item is in fact an early example of hypertext. CGMullin 20:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

After 1995? Brief history of important web sites or companies which played major role in developing the WWW?
I would like to see information on how the WWW developed after 1995, and the dot-com bubble, and how it became what is it today, and the role it has played in the world as it developed.

There should also be a brief history on important websites or companies which played an important role in the development of the WWW, such as MSN, Yahoo!, Google, Lycos, Excite, AOL and others.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

COTW rollover
When it comes time for the COTW rollover, the COTWnow edit was my March 27 edit. Sorry, it seems that I forgot to put the edit summary on the page. PDXblazers 16:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Web 2.0
Something about the current web 2.0 fad would go well in the last section, could someone add something about it? Htaccess 18:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Some good points and some bad points
This article is a broad and factually accurate article and meets four of the first six requirements for a good article. However, there are still some things that need fixing. The grammar and spelling are excellent but the introduction could do with being a bit longer and does not need the sentence "Wikipedia's "History of the internet" article tells that story". Instead just place the link in the see also section at the bottom. The paragraph structure is poor because there are no less than sixteen one-and-two sentence paragraphs. If possible the entire text should be condensed to give larger 4-5 sentence paragraphs.

There are also too many sections and subsections - five sections and two little subsections to be precise excluding the introduction, see also, references and external links. Consider removing the two subsections from the 1992-1995 section and also consider merging the three sections covering 1996-present day. Avoid using the article title in section headings whenever possible, e.g. a section titled "1992-1995: Development'" is better because it is pretty obvious that it is going to be about the development of the WWW between 1992-1995.

Now for the painful bit, just one citation and just two reference texts alluded to. For an article of this length there should be at least five or six inline citations and a couple more reference texts or a couple more external links. Fix all these and you have a strong FA candidate. Green Giant 23:10, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA
Inadequate references. Good otherwise. savidan(talk) (e@) 04:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't have time right now, but tommorrow, I can add that addresses the first cite needed tag. If somebody sees this before I get to it, the statement is reiterated (I don't know where it originally came from) is on Tim Berners-Lee's (sp?) faq on his web-page. Thus Spaketh Dave? (talk) 05:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

=Topics from 2007=

No mention of wikis?
mentions social networking websites, but says nothing about wikis. Given that wikis are undergoing something like an explosion in number, editorial participation, and browsing popularity, does anyone else think it would be appropriate to mention wikis in this section? In particular, it might be good to mention how wikis are, to some extent, a reaction against the steadily increasing complexity of Web development tools and protocols. In the early days of the Web, the relative simplicity of HTML, and the ease of learning from existing Web pages with View | Page Source in a browser, allowed lots of people to make straightforwardly useful Web pages quickly. But then Web site development became more complex and specialized. The View | Page Source function on most large Web sites today has become about as understandable to non-experts as a core dump. Wikis are like a way to "give the Web back" to non-specialists, by putting Web page development once again in reach of people who can master a simple markup language. It will be interesting to see if wikis repeat the evolution toward complexity, and some future technology springs up to provide (temporary) simplicity again. --Teratornis 07:11, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Interview with Robert Cailliau
Hi everyone,

we are preparing an interview at Wikinews with Robert Cailliau, all insightful questions are most welcome here: Wikinews:Story preparation/Interview with Robert Cailliau.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

=Topics from 2008=

Straying From The Subject?
I removed the paragraph about the introduction of tcp/ip from the "1980-1991: Development of the World Wide Web" section. The paragraph was out of context - many developments led to the establishment of the World Wide Web, including ARPANET in the late 1960s, but both that and the tcp/ip topic are well covered elsewhere on Wiki. The sudden diversion to the subject in the section on Tim Berners-Lee and his work in the 1980s and early 1990s was out of place and, I found, very distracting. —Dorgan65 (talk • contribs) 05:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I have removed an inaccurate statement from the introduction - which claimed that the World Wide Web was implemented in the 1940s.
 * Claim of 1940s removed

(Dorgan65 (talk) 05:54, 1 January 2008 (UTC))

Fair use rationale for Image:Google mainpage.png
Image:Google mainpage.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Provision of exact citation for the creation of the name World Wide Web
I notice that there is a request for citations. In particular, Berners-Lee settled on the name WorldWideWeb (no spaces). This is reported on page 29 of the paperback edition of the book Weaving the Web... (Михал Орела 13:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC))

However, as I was about to edit, I checked further and discovered an earlier text on p.23 which seems more appropriate. (Михал Орела 13:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC))

Done! The needs citation marker has been removed. (Михал Орела 14:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC))

Provision of exact citation for the SLAC web server
done! (Михал Орела 14:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC))

Removal of the Unreferenced notice
I do not see any other "citation required" items. Hence I removed "{ {Unreferenced|date=November 2007}}" so that the article does not look like it is being ignored by editors. (Михал Орела 14:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC))

Retrofit topic year headers/subpages
18-Nov-2008: I have added subheaders above as "Topics from 2006" (etc.) to emphasize the dates of topics in the talk-page. Older topics might still apply, but using the year headers helps to focus on more current issues as well. Afterward I inserted missing topic headers. Then I added "Talk-page subpages" beside the TOC. -Wikid77 (talk) 13:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Unprovable generalities
18-Nov-2008: Article text must be verifiable (per policy WP:VERIFY), and sweeping generalities, such as "most users prefer" cannot be proven. Even if Albert Einstein had said, "95% of people are not psycho" ...that is not proof, because it requires knowing all people, "95% of (all) people": the most that could appear in an article is a quote from Einstein about a generality. I will comment-out the following text, which states 5 generalities:


 * "These concepts in turn intrigued many bright, young, often underemployed people (many of Generation X), who realized that new business models would soon arise based on these possibilities, and wanted to be among the first to profit...." -Removed 18Nov08

Perhaps that text could be a quote from a recognized dotcom expert, but it should not be stated as absolutely true in Wikipedia. Beware of text that claims "many" or "most" or "all" as generalities, which are difficult to prove for small groups, and almost impossible to prove for large populations. Also see: WP:PEACOCK. -Wikid77 (talk) 13:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

web and business
How can the web change a business? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.100.36.24 (talk) 16:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Challenges to the Web
I suggest the article could be enhanced by a section with this title or similar. One fact it might detail is the first version of the Microsoft Network, which was designed as a proprietary Web killer, and for a few months in 1995 seemed a strong contender, (with many companies designing twin sites, one for the Web and one for MSN), before Microsoft admitted defeat to the Web. This crucial history tends to be sidelined or forgotten in the telling of the greater story. Engleham (talk) 09:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

=Topics from 2009=

Unassessed?
The article is a failed GA nominee. Why is this not even assessed to B-class?--Anoopkn (talk) 10:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

=Hypertext and Engelbart= There is no mention of Douglas Engelbart pioneering hypertext in his NLS (see also The Mother of All Demos) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.70.41.213 (talk) 00:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Invalid Markup
I have noticed that in the fourth paragraph there is some invalid Markup Code. [[Media:[[Link title]]]]== 1980–1991: Development of the World Wide Web== [[Image:Premier serveur Web.jpeg|thumb|left|200px|The [[NeXTcube]] used by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN (turned dow because tAceleator enterfor the VM/CMS operating system on the IBM mainframe as away to display SLAC’s cataog of web server outside of Europnd the rst in Noth America On Augst 6 19, Brners-Lee poste[http:/grupsggle.com/group/alt.hypertext/tree/browse_frm/hread/782e490e164c06/f61c1ef93da8398?rnum=1&hl=n&q=group%t.hpxt+autor%3Ftvc%26q%3Dgroup%3Aalt.hyertext+author%3ATim+author%3ABerners-Lee%26h%396Den909826dc_short ummay]of te World Wde eb proect on the alt.hypertext newsgroup. This date also marked the debut of the Web as apublicly avilable service on the Internet. Along with lots of spelling mistakes. Can someone clean that up?--Shrimp3000 (talk) 22:57, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * It's just vandalism, that also removed a large chunk of text— I reverted to the last good version. Zompist (talk) 23:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)