Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicola Pellow

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 03:46, 19 March 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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 no consensus.  Sandstein  20:32, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nicola Pellow

[edit]
Nicola Pellow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP1E. Coverage of her is limited to her work as an undergraduate intern in programming Line Mode Browser (the 2nd web browser) under the direction of Tim Berners-Lee. Little is known of her later or previous life, nor is coverage of her as a subject of sufficient depth for a standalone. Content is already in Line Mode Browser, Web Browser, and perhaps elsewhere so no need to merge. Icewhiz (talk) 09:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 09:45, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 09:47, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep While I would love to know what happened to her after CERN, that doesn't matter in terms of her notability. She passes ANYBIO #2. Her contribution to the creation of the Internet includes the first cross-platform browser on her own and a team she was part of later ported the browser. She also worked with Cailiau on the MacWWW. Multiple sources [1], [2], [3] show she was the one who created it, so she passes. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:13, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Even in this context, she is mentioned in passing as a programmer (a novice undergrad at CERN for a year who did a crash course in C) who wrote this crude browser to the specification of Berners-Lee, a port of previously written Next specific software.Icewhiz (talk) 20:34, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @Icewhiz: Berners-Lee et all in this paper states on page 458 that "The simple line mode browser 'www' originally written by Nicola Pellow has now become a general information access tool." In deciding if she was the person who created the browser, it was that paper and Berners-Lee et all that decided it for me. They clearly see her as the creator of the cross-platform browser. Other sources back the claim up. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:40, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Did you search for sources? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:57, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ritchie333: I actually did - and went over all (or most) of them (non-news as well). Her involvement as an intern in coding at CERN between November 1990 until August 1991 - passes WP:SIGCOV (including occasional mentions in web History or women in tech news stories). Some sources tack on a subsequent post-graduation return to CERN in 1992 in which she worked under the direction of Robert Cailliau on a Mac browser - as a 1-2 liner. I don't think she passes WP:BIO1E - and (assuming she's alive - I haven't been able to ascertain anything regarding post-1992 - and I at least tried (I did get to other Pellow's on LinkedIn, I wasn't able to find a name change (going on Nicola + "Line Mode" - to see if these is any coverage on a different surname)) WP:BLP1E is an issue as well (as she chose to remain private - all the sourcing here is the original CERN communique and subsequent recollection of people in CERN from her two brief stints at CERN). We do have an article on Line Mode Browser (which is what she coded in 1991) as well as coverage of the event in History of the web browser.Icewhiz (talk) 11:29, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to either Line Mode Browser, Web Browser rather than delete because her name is a likely search term. It really does seem to fit WP:BLP1E. She may, of course, at some point draw a Rosalind Franklin sort of attention, and that sort of revisiting of Pellow's life story by journalists and playwrights, would at that point support an article.E.M.Gregory (talk)
  • Delete (or redirect, since that usually seems to happen in this kind of case). This seems like a perfect example of BLP1E as mentioned already. Ritchie's keep vote above should be discounted at the moment since there's no rationale behind it. MLG gives ANYBIO #2 for keeping (The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.). But I hardly think this qualifies in this case, since the explanatory note there begins: Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians... Pellow seems to be noted for her contributions, but (from what I can see) doesn't seem to have been written about in any sort of depth. So I don't understand the rationale to keep here. --Deacon Vorbis (talk) 21:03, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Deacon Vorbis: There is a perfectly short and simple rationale, which is "if you search for sources, you will find many that can be used for this article", including De Montford University, Daily Telegraph, Ars Technica, PC Magazine, The Guardian, IT World, ZDNet, The Guardian (again). Etc, etc etc..... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:16, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
None of those sources can be used for this article, other than to verify Pellow's involvement in the browser development. None of those sources write about Pellow in any greater depth than that. One only mentions her in a picture caption; and all but one give more than about one sentence mentioning her; and that last one not much more. If anything, these sources do nothing but confirm that Pellow shouldn't have a separate article per WP:BLP1E and WP:ANYBIO #2. --Deacon Vorbis (talk) 16:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) @Ritchie333: Sources exist - that is not in question. The sole question here is BIO1E and (assuming she's alive) BLP1E. All the soruces out there repeat the same story - giving Pellow credit for the Line Mode Browser. No one has even interviewed her or spoken to her since (presumably because she doesn't want to (BLP1E) or isn't able to - since it probably would be publishable!). None of these sources treat Pellow as the subject - the subject is the line mode browser and Pellow gets credit for it. Going through the sources you provided:
  1. [4] - repeats what we have in our article (and not particularly RS). Tellingly - this publication of her alma mater in 2015 (crediting her with "a bit of help" to WWW) wasn't able to add anything post 1992.
  2. [5] - screenshot of Line Mode Browser with a mention of Pellow in the caption.
  3. [6] - repeat of the same Line Mode Browser Story.
  4. [7] - a one sentence mention of the line mode browser with Pellow.
  5. [8] - a one sentence mention of a generic browser by Pellow.
  6. [9] - a one sentence mention of the line mode browser.
  7. [10] - a one sentence mention which (wrongly, this was the 2nd.) states Pellow created the first web browser.
  8. [11] - a one sentence mention of the line mode browser and pellow.Icewhiz (talk) 16:39, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:51, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly the fact that she developed the worlds first cross platform browser makes her notable. More tommorrow. scope_creep (talk) 20:37, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This was a crude text only port to C of the existing first browser (that was graphical, but NEXT specific), that displayed HTML on a dumb terminal (all text). But what is really missing here is anything beyond BIO1E (and assuming she's alive BLP1E).Icewhiz (talk) 20:42, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Anything that is defined as brand new, newly invented, as having never being known before tends to be very crude, in design, think of the first lightbulb or the first telephone, but that doesn't negate her notability. By stating the above, you have stated that she was the first person to use HTML, which again makes here notable. It was clear design decision, by a team, which truly changed the world, to try and include as many people as possible, as early as possible, to make it a success. You can't make a value judgement based on that criteria, because it is impossible to know whether the project was going to be a successfcul, with or without her. As regard your statement DGG, this wasn't some team inventing a new fuel at BP or new engine at GE. That one event was primary change, completely fundamental. A complete shifting of the world. I have never believed in BIO1E and BLP1E as they preclude a whole bunch of perfectly valid and notable folk should have had articles, and enables those folk who shouldn’t have articles, but because they have a name attached to them, they get automatic entry, like certain Apple or Facebook folk. BIO1E and BLP1E are merely guidelines, when the event is that large. They are guidelines that don't apply at this level. If the web was invented yesterday, and an encyclopaedia sprang up, she would have an article, along with most of the team that worked on the project. scope_creep (talk) 12:21, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Crude in relation to the first web browser - WorldWideWeb (which was graphical, with a WYSIWYG HMTL editor). The Line Mode Browser was a small side project (that lived on as a test bed) - view-only, that dumped out a web page to the console.Icewhiz (talk) 14:08, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Lets remove the fact she was an intern, which is nothing to do with the fact of her notability. scope_creep (talk) 12:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Tim Berners-Lee must have thought her important enough to include her in the primary document, sourced by Megalibrarygirl. scope_creep (talk) 12:45, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Tim Berners-Lee was gracious in handing out credits - not all great inventors are good at handing out credits to underlings and assistants - however Berners-Lee did indeed mention even visiting students who had a contribution.Icewhiz (talk) 14:08, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Icewhiz, You seem to be trying to box the arguments, as though notability is defined by who relates to what, which is false. There is no causal link between crudeness and notablity. It was certainly crude in terms of look and feel, but it has own article, which means its notable, which means crudeness is not an argument. The idea you are positing in the fact that he was gracious, is nonsense, and is entirely subjective. Lee probably realised it was absoluely fundamental primary work, and perhaps decided to include everybody, but you don't known that for fact. It is subjective argument. I could email him, and ask him. That is what I'm going to do tonight, to determine what he thinks about it. On the teams I worked on, up to about 50-60 folk on projects up to £50-£60million, have I ever heard anybody refered to an underling. It is not done. Such terms don't exist in places like Cern, which is an equal opportunities employee, and takes it very seriously. Mutual respect is the name of the game. scope_creep (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Line Mode Browser as she was part of a team which developed it and henceforth, there were no other achievements. If the only claim to fame is being part of a team and creating something, it should be mentioned in the article of the invention. This case is very similar to the case of Paul Viola and Michael Jones whose Viola–Jones object detection framework is remarkably well known (the original paper has 16000 citations), and yet they don't have dedicated articles on the authors (because sources describe the work rather than the people). Similarly there is no article about Jean-François Groff who was also part of the team similar to Nicola Pellow. I had a careful look at the sources shown by Icewhiz and there is only a very brief mention of Pellow. I guess a redirect or a merge is appropriate.--DreamLinker (talk) 16:49, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    They should have though. We are not a paper encylopedia and it is worth keeping, as she is notable. She is notable because
    1. She was the first person to use HTML (in anger) in a client application.
    2. She was the first person to build a cross platform browser (All the other people who have built browsers have articles.)
    3. She was directly cited by Berners-Lee himself in the primary paper that explains the design of the web.
    4. She worked closely with Berers-Lee, to build a product, which Lee thought was needed to get the Web going.
    5. She worked on a team, which changed the world.
    Lets not be WP:EAGER to delete this. WP:BADNAC is a good policy. scope_creep (talk) 21:03, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Beyond BIO1E, WP:NOTINHERITED clearly applies to many of these claims - and arguably also for the coding itself per the direction of her supervisor.Icewhiz (talk) 21:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The first three aren't and easily satisfy WP:BIO. scope_creep (talk) 12:07, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The first (first to use HTML) isn't sourced (and isn't in our article nor HTML) - and they all result from working as a very junior member on a 19 person team in under Berners-Lee - in any event in BIO1E territory. Note she isn't cited by Berners-Lee - she is briefly mentioned - The simple line mode browser "www" originally written by Nicola Pellow has now become a general information access tool. (that's it, nothing else).Icewhiz (talk) 13:29, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment on claims
    • She was the first person to use HTML (in anger) in a client application. - Unreferenced claim
    • She was directly cited by Berners-Lee himself in the primary paper that explains the design of the web. - Being directly cited doesn't mean someone is notable. The amount of contribution matters. [12] has exactly 1 or 2 lines about her including "Nicola Pellow is freelance at CERN for a short while"
    • She worked closely with Berers-Lee, to build a product, which Lee thought was needed to get the Web going. - Not sure how this is important. Many others worked on teams as part of the www initiative at a similar position.
    • She was the first person to build a cross platform browser (All the other people who have built browsers have articles.) - The others who have articles are also known for other contributions, unlike Pellow who is a WP:BIO1E case
    • She worked on a team, which changed the world. In that case it is the team which is notable and the innovation which is notable. The team gets an article or the innovation gets an article and Pellow should be mentioned in it. Every member of the team doesn't get a separate article then--DreamLinker (talk) 16:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      Note that as you might see here - [13], or here - [14] - Berners-Lee had a whole string of visiting students in the early 90s and many of them did the "first" www something. Most of them do not rate an article - e.g. Jean-Francois Groff or Arthur Secret. Some of them went on to do more notable things. Others have some documented trail, and some (such as Pellow) - have no post-CERN trail at all.Icewhiz (talk) 16:55, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nicola_Pellow&oldid=1077958295"