Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First image on the Web

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 of the nomination was Keep. A bit of web trivia, adequately sourced by the Wired article which cites Gennero, who was there. The copyright status of the image is another matter. --Tony Sidaway 19:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First image on the Web

This article seems like a hoax.....for being such a monumental topic, it has one source, that being the website of the guy who uploaded the image. The website claims the uploader knew the guy who invented the internet in 1992. It smells a bit stale to me. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 00:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete unless published verification surfaces. The claim doesn't seem obviously false, but it does seem far-fetched enough (for reasons given on the talk page) that it needs a lot more verifiability. --Allen 01:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Obvious hoax. The JFIF format wasn't published until September 1992, and it took a good few months before any applications started to use it. Tevildo 01:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment article claims this is the original image, but not that it's the original file. In fact, per the talk page, it can't be. (IIRC it was a GIF.) Opabinia regalis 01:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• • Comment "Hoax" may be the wrong word, considering other comments. However, I can still put my hand on my heart and swear that _this_ image couldn't have been on the web, such as it was, in 1992. The first image on the web might have been _similar_ to this one, but, whatever it was, it wasn't _actually_ this one. Tevildo 01:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Weirdly this may actually check out. Artw 01:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Some more debate over the veracity or otherwise of this claim at slashdot. Artw 01:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and my vote is Merge and redirect, regardless of veracity it's an interestinmg story but one more properly told on the Les Horribles Cernettes page. Artw 01:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep if sourced I saw Les Horribles Cernettes at CERN a few years ago and this claim was made during the performance, but that's no better of a source than what's already there. I'll look around if I get a chance. Opabinia regalis 01:06, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Change to merge to Les Horribles Cernettes as a notable internet legend, but I can't find any online sources that don't ultimately trace back to Silvano de Gennaro. (I know Robert Cailliau has mentioned it in talks, but haven't found any transcripts.) Opabinia regalis 03:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. I've previously heard of the "Cernettes" as having the first band website. Also, Silvano de Gennaro isn't just some guy, he's a Ph.D. in Computer Science at CERN who has been there since 1977. So it is safe to say that he knows something about the early days of the Internet. On the other hand, it may depend on what you mean by "first picture." Here's the discussion about this image that appeared on Slashdot a while back. Crypticfirefly 01:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Les Horribles Cernettes, but do not merge unless the claim is verified (it seems to be in doubt according to Crypticfirefly's post). — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk • E 02:06, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete or cite. WP:V not met. --Chris (talk) 02:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:V in its current state. I have no problem with merging this to Les Horribles Cernettes, though. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 03:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Les Horribles Cernettes. --DaveG12345 04:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete WP:V cannot be met until mentioned in peer-reviewed reputable venue. -Seidenstud 05:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I actually tried to contact Tim Berners-Lee about this, but he apparently has better things to do than answering to research queries on, ahem, rather minor topics. The article content is pretty much unverifiable, but the topic itself is interesting enough that a Merge and Redirect to les Horribles Cernettes cannot hurt -- Ferkelparade π 11:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge or Redirect per DaveG12345 --Alphachimp ^talk 13:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:V... I knew I'd seen this somewhere before, covered on (and picked apart) slashdot a while back. Redirect if, and only if, it gets sourced.--Isotope23 14:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - except if it can be verified. --Kungfu Adam ^(talk) 15:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, unless can be verified. If verified, Merge and Redirect --Domthedude001 17:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Without WP:VER it counts for nothing and the onus is on the article's author to provide references. -- Alias Flood 21:55, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, or Merge/Redirect - the claim was published in Wired Magazine in 1999; the link to the article was in the article for Les Horribles Cernettes - See An article in Wired magazine, from 1999, 2nd page. This also was discussed on the talk page.KWH 06:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment to Ikiroid - of course it's a monumental topic/claim with only one source, here's another. ;) KWH 06:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to Les Horribles Cernettes, not because the image isn't notable but because there's not really that much to say about it, seriously. (We have articles on notable photographs but this isn't exactly "memorable", unless you count the fact that CERN physicists can pick some awful background colors for supposed promo pics =) =) =) Too bad Wayback Machine wasn't invented yet... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 18:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
• The Wired article claims that it was one of the first five images published on the Web. Just for the record. Their mp3s are pretty damn good, though. No vote. DS 04:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I've added a new section to the talk page, I think I 'may' have disproved the claim. However I was never connected to the internet before the web came along, and need to confirm a few points. As there is discussion as the the factual accuracy of this article in the talk pages, i'm sure whoever decides on this one will look there. --JeffUK 00:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete As I've said before, there is no reliable way to verify this claim - All we have is one person who claims this is true, and a single news source that parroted it. Merging this to Les Horribles Cernettes will not solve the fact that it's still unverifiable information, regardless of the article in which it resides. ~ Booya ^Bazooka 00:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't agree that it cannot be verified. It certainly can't easily be verified by multiple sources, but I believe it's arguable that Gennaro is a reliable source, also that it's possible for TBL to be contacted (although that needs to be done carefully, we don't want to spam the poor guy! Also, the fact that this has been claimed by Gennaro is a verifiable fact, the cernettes article need not say that it is the truth, only that it has been claimed.--JeffUK 00:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I'm also concerned about the copyright status of this image. I'd hate to shoot down such an interesting discussion with a technicality, but i think we need to look into the 'fair use' claim. (do we need to consider Swiss copyright law?) If anyone agrees that this may be a copyvio, can they tag the relevant image, or ask me to do so. --JeffUK 00:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - we're clearly in US fair use territory (critical commentary on the image itself). I think the question of complying to Swiss law may be moot; my read of the situation is that someone who wants to bring a case against en.wiki under a provision of foreign copyright law would have a lot of obstacles in asserting jurisdiction in the foreign country. (Possibly excepting Germany, as I understand there is a mirror there?) The applicable part of Swiss Copyright Law [1], according to a rough machine translation, appears to be:

  Article 25 - Quotation

  1. quotations of published works may be quoted, if the quotation for explanation, when reference serves or for the illustration and is justified by this purpose the range of the quotation.

  2. the quotation as such and the source must be designated. One refers in the source to the authority, then this is to be indicated likewise.

  • For what it's worth, if a case were brought in a US court in a conflict of laws scenario, I think the court would uphold the fair use as being in line with the public policy intent of both countries copyright laws. Wasn't that a fun exercise? KWH 22:01, 10 July 2006 (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.