Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First website ever made


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy merge to History of the World Wide Web. There is clearly no desire to delete this article despite its truly terrible title -- presumably because it's a broadly plausible search term. There is already a mention of Tim Berners-Lee's work creating the CERN site in History of the World Wide Web, the redirect target proposed by the nominator and others, so I will redirect the article there. The history will still be available if an editor wishes to incorporate it at the target article.  A  Train talk 22:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

First website ever made

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Short article that should be deleted/merged with History of the World Wide Web. (Note: the "merge discussion" the page is tagged with doesn't seem to exist.) Notable topic, but there isn't much to say about it, and it fits quite well into an already existant article. Nerd1a4i (talk) 16:56, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Mark the trainDiscuss 17:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Mark the trainDiscuss 17:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect Merge to History of the World Wide Web per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:34, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 *  Weak Keep – Significant coverage found here, here, and here (and I know #2 is the Daily Mail, but wouldn't it count for notability purposes?). There is probably more out there as well and if some editor can find more then I'll be ready to remove the 'weak' .  J 947(c) (m) 18:40, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, The Hindu has a paragraph about it (see here, admittedly it's not much but still worth it).  J 947(c) (m) 02:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * But the one that really seals the deal for me is The Telegraph, with an enormous amount of coverage of it and Tim Berners-Lee. That's enough for me to remove the 'weak'.  J 947(c) (m) 02:31, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * There's also heaps of science, tech, and history news website entries out there. Not sure if they are WP:RS though:, , , , , https:/ /www.newsbytesapp.com/timeline/Science/10090/55547/internaut-day-for-the-love-of-internet (the website is blacklisted so I can't link), , . There's some more as well but I won't bother listing them. Also, there's a CNN article.  J 947(c) (m) 02:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * More coverage: CNN, CBC International Business Times, Echonetdaily, Wired, ExtremeTech Entrepreneur, Andhra Wishesh, Salon... Clearly this article meets GNG; even with The Daily Telegraph and The Huffington Post alone it would probably be notable.  J 947(c) (m) 05:47, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect. This article really seems to lack basic Wiki-Notability. Although it is interesting, it would be better to merge it than the keep a permastub. Given the reasonable amount of sources, it would better to move it to info.cern.ch keeping this title as a redirect. Dysklyver 20:41, 1 October 2017 (UTC) 09:38, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep as no argument for deletion has been advanced. If the merge discussion hasn't been started then simply start that discussion rather than an unnecessary deletion discussion. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:29, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per nom. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 19:55, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * As per Metropolitan90, I'm not opposed to a merge if there is content to merge, but this is not a feasible stand-alone topic or a good article title. I don't support keeping this as a stand-alone article, and no amount of references to newspapers or blogs will change my mind. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 14:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment – Could you guys please address the sources that I have found?  J 947(c) (m)  02:17, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've switched from "redirect" to "merge" above, but I still don't think this title should have an article of its own. If people think this should be an article of its own, it should be re-titled something like info.cern.ch, the name of the web site, rather than by a description. (info.cern.ch is, in fact, a redirect to History of the World Wide Web.) --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:22, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge & redirect to History of the World Wide Web per above. If the article is kept, it needs to be moved to a more encyclopedic title — there's no First car ever made article, and for good reason. I guess it's a reasonably plausible search term, though, so the redirect is worth having.  A  Train talk 11:29, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Clarification, because this discussion seems to have morphed into the merge/redirect discussion that should have taken place at Talk:History of the World Wide Web, or the merge/redirect should have been WP:BOLDly performed. My "speedy keep" opinion expressed above was not on the basis that I think this should be kept as a seperate article, which I don't because this is an encyclopedia rather than the Guinness Book of Records, but simply that there was no need to go through the drama of an AfD discussion to achieve the obvious outcome. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.