Talk:Paris, Texas

message: I have lived in Paris Texas for 8 months and have commonly heard locals refer to themselves as Parisites and have yet to hear anyone use the word Parisian.  Parisite is the commonly used term, therefore it should be the header of that section.
----
I had lived in Paris Texas (2004~ 2017). During my time I have heard numerous times, that new residents of Paris, Texas are 'Parasites'. Only after a length of stay, qualification period, does a resident, qualify to be called a 'Parisian'.
Raju Patel, Paris, Texas.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abviparis (talk • contribs) 08:58, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have lived in Paris for 23 years and have yet to hear any citizens refer to us as Parisites other than in a joking fashion, not to be taken seriously. 99.197.210.224 (talk) 03:27, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Parisites Vs. Parisians

message: I'm not certain how it should be mentioned, but the Chicago Tribune recently reported on a number of racist incidents, one in particular, which have occured in Paris. It might be worthy of mention if someone can decide how to incorporate it. Here is the article. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0703120170mar12,0,1435953.story Elijya 20:23, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Racism

message: As a Paris resident myself, and an English professor, I speak with some authority on the matter when I say we from Paris call ourselves Parisites as opposed to "Parisians", and both titles are grammatically correct under English syntax. This has been edited many times by other people but continues to be removed in an apparent edit war. Please discuss changes here before reverting from Parisites. 66.76.72.25 19:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be helpful if you could link to some external uses of this term. A link or two to an article from an established Paris, Texas newspaper showing the preference of Parisites over Parisians would help make a compelling case. --Zippy 16:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The comments of anonymous user 66.76.72.25 are complete nonsense.  Take a look at his/her contributions (keeping in mind that IP address could be a public and/or shared computer) to see that almost all are senseless vandalism (see edits to Barbara Jordan article).  Speaking as a former Paris resident, use of the descriptive "Parisite" is considered ignorant at best and insulting at worst. --Kenken71 15:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I just did a search. The Paris, Texas visitors guide uses "Parisian" (p4, first para, "The flowering of Parisian culture ..."). Unless there's compelling evidence to the contrary, I'd like to put the "parisites" bit to rest. --Zippy 18:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I did another search, this one of The Paris News for any articles in the last 30 days using either Parisian or Parisite, and got no matches. The paper uses the form "Joe Smith, a resident of Paris" instead. --Zippy 19:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No matches for 'parisite' or 'parisian' (including plural forms) on the web site for Paris Junior College. --Zippy 22:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Two June 22, 2008 articles by Mary Madewell, Managing Editor of The Paris News, titled "Volunteer to be inducted into Hall of Fame" (News Section) and "Perry’s plan not enough to carry him through" (Opinion Section) refer to residents as "Parisians" (like residents of the French capital). Arguments to date in favor of 'parisite' (on this page and the main article) have been entirely anecdotal running counter to Wikipedia guidelines of Verifiability and Reliable Sources. --Kenken71 (talk) 19:01, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parisites 

message: This appears to be a group of public/shared computers (possibly geographically close to Paris given the interest in local affairs).  See talk page User_talk:66.76.72.25.  Edits from that IP address should be closely monitored for vandalism. --Kenken71 15:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I find this rather offensive.  This makes all the users from this IP seem to be misfit vandals Hell-bent on destroying Wikipedia.  Had Kenken71 done further research on the matter, it can be seen the anonymous IP account is a school network of computers, in which literally thousands of individuals have access to.  Although it is true many deliquents vandalize and abuse Wikipedia as an educational tool, many edits that have been made are lucid, constructive additions that acheive the ultimate goal of Wikipedia: the creation of a more accurate and detailed encyclopedia than possible with physical books.  I find the comment highly inflammatory and prejudical, not allowing for the dozens of constructive edits made.  Kenken71, please reconsider if not retract your statement, the "Parisian" vs. "Parisite" issue can be handled without mudslinging.  I am willingly to show you several editions of the Paris News (the local newspaper servicing the area in question) proving a credible link to the use of Parisite as a reference to local citizens.  In one article, the Paris News even conducts a survey of Paris citizens asking them their preference of "Parisite" vs "Parisian".  Please discuss this matter with me. Thank you 74.193.86.114 05:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits from Anonymous User 66.76.72.25 

message: I was noticing the controversies section seems to, in my opinion, detract from the article as a whole and not quite meet notability standards.  I'm failing to see how it contributes to the overall article, and was wondering if anyone else got the same impression.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.76.7.66 (talk) 07:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies 

message: After reading the section on lynchings, I don't believe it met the criteria for inclusion into the article.  Any thoughts? 74.193.91.36 (talk) 04:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lynchings 

message: The section on racism seems to be non-notable and detract from the article.  The events mentioned in the section are not noteworthy on an individual basis, and as a whole the section appears as though it doesn't belong.  Any thoughts? 74.197.168.224 (talk) 10:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no reason why it shouldn't be kept. The racism in Paris was covered extensively in national news outlets, it is apparently a prevalent problem there, and the section is cited.Athene cunicularia (talk) 16:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  If every town with a racist history were covered, the argument could be made that every town would need this inclusion in the article over it.  "Covered extensively" is a subjective term, even so, one could argue the Detroit, Michigan page includes no mention of racism, despite the ACLU mention of recent racist events published here [], or the Huffington Post article , or even the internal Wikipedia articles about the Detroit race riots here []. Racism being a prevalent problem is also subjective, and, reviewing the sources, they cite two recent (within the past five years) incidents, and one incident around the turn of the 20th century.  This hardly seems a prevalent problem. Again, I move this section should be at least re-organized as to fit in the article more subtly, or possibly removed. 74.197.168.224 (talk) 07:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no problem adding mention of those items in articles about Detroit, etc. The racist incidents listed here, however, concern Paris, Texas, as they were recently covered in national newspapers. To remove substantiated facts simply because you disagree with them goes against the mission of Wikipedia. Like it or not, the recent racist incidents are now part of Paris' modern day history.Athene cunicularia (talk) 18:14, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The removed content is backed by the Paris News website, www.theparisnews.com, the parties of the alleged incident were freed of all charges.  Again, I would like to revisit my argument that this section lacks notability standards. 74.197.168.224 (talk) 08:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Keep the content, add the update with citations.Athene cunicularia (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racism 

message: List of songs about ParisShadowy Men on a Shadowy Planet’s “Memories of Gay Paree was most likely about Paris, Ontario. The video featured a scale model layout of Paris, France.Civic Cat (talk) 19:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: any songs about Paris, Texas?

message: Just a little more info about my revision, since my note got mangled -- Saying something "was" part of history implies that it was, but no longer is part of the history. In other words, you wouldn't say the Battle of The Alamo was an important part of Texas history, even though it took place in the past. You'd say it is an important part of Texas history. So, even though the lynchings are an "unfortunate" part of Paris history, they are still a part.Athene cunicularia (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The word was is past tense implying that something is no longer the case. An event that occurred 2,000 years ago is a part of world history, not was.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Is" vs. "was" part of history 

message: In the Simpsons, the Rich Texan mentioned Paris, Texas,  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.54.117 (talk) 19:14, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Simpsons 

message: Eiffel Tower Replica section has some info that should be moved to List of Eiffel Tower replicas. If not moven, general stuff about replicas do not belong here.
And, the Eiffel Tower height is wrong. It is claimed to be 984 ft, while Eiffel Tower article has this: The tower is 324 metres (1,063 ft) tall, 79 feet more. 85.217.21.147 (talk) 11:30, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Eiffel Tower Replica" section 

message: Editors are continually trying to remove the the "Race relations" section. I don't see a good reason for this, but editors who want to do this are invited to make their case here. Absent that the the suspicion that this is being done for chamber-of-commerce type reasons can't be avoided, and I ask all editors to roll back any large unexplained text removals, especially those which might be whitewashing. Herostratus (talk) 02:43, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whitewashing of history. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Paris, Texas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060515044037/http://tapestry.usgs.gov/physiogr/physio.html to http://tapestry.usgs.gov/physiogr/physio.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928130938/http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/parole/parole-directory/paroledir-rgnldisparoff1.htm to http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/parole/parole-directory/paroledir-rgnldisparoff1.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:25, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: What would happen if an airport started here? I know the IATA code would be unique, but what about lists for humans to pick from? City and Country?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.201.33.24 (talk) 18:36, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Software lists

message: The race relations section is a bit difficult to read because there are quotations thrown in the middle of paragraphs which makes everything spaced out and makes it difficult to determine what to read next. I propose that the quotations are incorporated into the main paragraph to make the section flow in a more clear and logical way. DiscoStu42 (talk) 01:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting of Race Relations section 

message: Does magic tricks and chokes on cheese sticks. He’s the best if you want to see him try going to Buffalo Joes. 129.130.18.225 (talk) 02:08, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best Magician Ever 

message: Beaver's Bend Resort Park is sixty miles away across the Oklahoma state line. Becalmed (talk) 04:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Beaver's Bend listed as a local attraction?