Talk:History of the World Wide Web

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee History of the World Wide Web was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
April 3, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed
WikiProject Computing (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Internet (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Early Web History
This article, History of the World Wide Web, is within the scope of the Task force on Early Web History, a collaborative effort within WikiProject Websites to improve the coverage of early history of the World Wide Web, and its articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 

/1


what? (US-centric tag)[edit]

Can someone please explain to me just how exactly this article is US-centric? Jersey John (talk) 02:51, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

really: I can't say it why Johnanth tagged the article so! mabdul 05:56, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
The article has been apparently wrongly tagged as US-centric for over 2 years. I propose to remove the tag unless there are good reasons to the contrary. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

What's missing[edit]

I've recently greatly expanded the article AOL Hometown, and there's one quote I came upon during research for that that's made me think:

"But the fact is, these people were brought online and given a place for themselves. Like a turkey drawn with a child's hand or a collection of snow globes collected from a life well-lived, these sites were hand-made, done by real people, with no agenda or business plan or knowledge, exactly, of how everything under the webservers worked. They were paying for their accounts, make no mistake – this was often provided to them as a tool combined with their AOL accounts. [...] Some of these websites had existed for a decade. [...]
We're talking about terabytes, terabytes of data, of hundreds of thousands of man-hours of work, crafted by people, an anthropological bonanza and a critical part of online history, wiped out because someone had to show that they were cutting costs this quarter."

This current article History of the World Wide Web is all about stuff such as hardware, HTML, and the history of browsers. But that's not so much what brought the masses to the net back in the 90s. It were those quirky, hand-made private little websites with their odd, archaic, gaudy look, private sites on people's pet peeves. It was both making and surfing these whimsical sites in a time when layouts weren't as polished and standardized as they are today. You know, all this fuzzy, technically unsavvy, emotional right-brain, arty, private stuff so different from all the cold (or "left-brained") technology and coding stuff that these pioneers circumvented by using the first WYSIWYG editors that companies and providers gave them. It was, like, social media before it became interactive, it was site owners here and site surfers there, but they didn't come together as "hive-mind user-generated content" yet as does Web 2.0 today. This was Web 1.0 (after the Web 0.5 of mostly-text Usenet), as the public masses first got to know it during the 90s.

So I thought, shouldn't the history of the WWW up to the Dot-Com Bubble around 1999/2000 also communicate the significance of places such as GeoCities (1994), Tripod.com (1995), Angelfire (1996), AOL Hometown (1997 or earlier?), and FortuneCity (1997), all offering simple, private little websites for simple people with no "knowledge, exactly, of how everything under the webservers worked", where they could show their often rather un-techy hobbies to the world and explore other people's pet peeves, those nostalgic days of quirky, handmade, archaic, vintage, gaudy, little private sites that have brought people on the net for the very first time, the significance of all that within the history and growth of the internet into what it is today?

If you think we could have it at this article, I suggest this bit could either go within the section 1992–1995: Growth of the WWW, or at 1996–1998: Commercialization of the WWW. Or do you think it would be more appropriate at History of the internet instead? --79.193.34.164 (talk) 21:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

What might also be relevant here is the rationale of the Internet Archive as to why they're trying to back up GeoCities as complete as is possible: "GeoCities has been an important outlet for personal expression on the Web for almost 15 years." Just as the longer quote above says, all these private little websites of Web 1.0 were "an anthropological bonanza and a critical part of online history". --79.193.34.164 (talk) 23:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

On kinda Pavel Schilling's invention of the Internet facts[edit]

Hypertext first place related with: Argentina, as referenced by a Harvard lady ([1][2]}, since considering Talmud would imply going back to Gilgamesh. First places related with HTML: Switzerland, UK and Belgium ([3][4][5][6][7][8]), World1982, since considering IBM would imply going back to Sumerian abacus. Bonus: from the lands ([9]*) of Linux([10]) and Versuche über Pflanzen-Hybriden** ([11]). *Although not libros, unfortunately the best online references, books, are copyrighted by an island. **Image found by searching for genome and racism.

Oldest web page[edit]

I'm not sure how best to do it, but this surely belongs in the article.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC)