Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

HKP wrote:@bluebag. You never answered my question; do you agree that the McCann.html could have been in existence 30/04 despite the question mark over the main Ceop page?

HKP wrote:@bluebag. I don't know if this WILL turn out to be an error, I don't work for Archive.org, you should maybe have a look at the way that the Wayback recreates the pages it displays, there's plenty there to discuss.

@NickE. Can you expand on that please.

What is the $UsnJrnl File?

Skyrocket1 wrote:BlueBag
Don't want to get in the middle of yours and HKP's mano a mano but I thought you were an expert?

BlueBag wrote:

Get'emGonçalo wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The wayback machine was screwed for this page.

This is a fact.

whodunnit wrote:And archive.is is the same as the Wayback Machine? they are interchangeable?

HKP wrote:@syn. When did you complete this screenshot, archive.org are probably all over the place since it was first pointed out over a week ago.

HKP wrote:@syn. Its not their 'copy' its direct from archive.org

Skyrocket1 wrote:@ Syn

I mentioned archive.is earlier.

There are other pages including a 9 May CEOP press release regarding MBM's disappearance which again contains reference to the 20070430115803 time stamp in its code BUT the question is why? How?

If the mccann.html was grabbed on the 30 April - how? The page can't have been intentionally uploaded with live links to the rest of the CEOP site - I'm sorry but that's twilight zone thinking. So how did the WBM access this page in the first place? I'm certainly not saying that this didn't happen by accident - there are too many wierd things going on here to dismiss that.

I am fairly convinced that the ceop.gov.uk 'October' home page was actually from a 23 October grab. A second page which originated on 23 october 2007 showed up with the 20070430115803 date stamp on it, linked to the 'October' home pages before the 18 June changes. So we have 2 October pages which were wrong and dated 30 April. This second page has only 2 calendar dates - 23 October and 30 April - and the 30 April date is wrong, no question.

I think CEOP were uploading on 23 October 2007. I know a grab was done on 23 October.

Also, I don't believe it's possible to have any pages with the same time stamp - check out others. Dates are the same but time stamps aren't. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Another thing to note but probably of no relevance is that ceop.gov.uk and ceop.gov.uk/index.asp are both calendar records of the homepage but with independent grab dates. 

Still I have a gut feeling there is something more here than a simple computer glitch.

By the way, orginally I thought the 23 October podcast referred to on the 'October' home page might have been BBC but I think it was a CEOP one produced for teachers to access by registering with the site.

One last thing, was the WBM actually trawling in 2007 - I read somewhere that up to a certain date after inception the archive was relying on voluntary uploads for its content. Does anyone know if I have misunderstood that or know the date aat which general widescale trawling started?

whodunnit wrote:@sharoni---"Is it possible that either:
The URL existed on 30 April 2007 and that the contents of the HTML have changed or

The original HTML was in draft, ready for publication on 30 April 2007?  Would the archive pick up created material that was published later?"

The archive can only pick up published pages. Most pages have 'static' content--'dead' for lack of a better word, unchangeable like a printed photograph---and 'dynamic' content, content with javascript, like a script that converts text to clickable links. On WBM these links will update automatically, [the explanation for this is right in the FAQ] leading to the nearest available updated content. Basically this means WBM 'took a picture' of mccann.html just as it was on April 30, 2007, while the link to the uploadable poster led to the nearest update of the poster, I think a June date?

Anyway, there had to be a link TO mccann.html in order for it to be picked up by the archiving process.

This link was provided by the CEOP homepage captured by WBM at the same date and time as the April 30th mccann page. [this is proven by sequential coding as I explained above] The fact that there are October 23 links showing on the April 30 homepage capture [again, sequential coding going forward from April 27 and looking backward from May 14 prove this capture date ] cannot be explained by a misfiling of a capture that never occurred as there are no captures in 2007 past October 12. Again, this is proven by sequential coding. Therefore, I conclude the October link TO THE PRESS RELEASE is either 'dynamic' content---while there is no capture of the homepage on October 23, a CEOP press release for that date does exist.---or WBM caught CEOP in the act of editing the April 30th page.


My bet is on the latter.

sharonl wrote:

whodunnit wrote:@sharoni---"Is it possible that either:
The URL existed on 30 April 2007 and that the contents of the HTML have changed or

The original HTML was in draft, ready for publication on 30 April 2007?  Would the archive pick up created material that was published later?"

The archive can only pick up published pages. Most pages have 'static' content--'dead' for lack of a better word, unchangeable like a printed photograph---and 'dynamic' content, content with javascript, like a script that converts text to clickable links. On WBM these links will update automatically, [the explanation for this is right in the FAQ] leading to the nearest available updated content. Basically this means WBM 'took a picture' of mccann.html just as it was on April 30, 2007, while the link to the uploadable poster led to the nearest update of the poster, I think a June date?

Anyway, there had to be a link TO mccann.html in order for it to be picked up by the archiving process.

This link was provided by the CEOP homepage captured by WBM at the same date and time as the April 30th mccann page. [this is proven by sequential coding as I explained above] The fact that there are October 23 links showing on the April 30 homepage capture [again, sequential coding going forward from April 27 and looking backward from May 14 prove this capture date ] cannot be explained by a misfiling of a capture that never occurred as there are no captures in 2007 past October 12. Again, this is proven by sequential coding. Therefore, I conclude the October link TO THE PRESS RELEASE is either 'dynamic' content---while there is no capture of the homepage on October 23, a CEOP press release for that date does exist.---or WBM caught CEOP in the act of editing the April 30th page.


My bet is on the latter.

That makes sense.

Thanks for clearing that up.