Talk:1 Night in Paris

message: I removed the word "authorized"--it's plainly clear she did not authorize the release.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PEOPLE_PARIS_HILTON?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=HOME
:She may not have authorised the release but she later settled her suit, as mentioned in the article, and at that point it became authorised.  As to the claims made by Hilton in the link you give above, Hilton is hardly a reliable source.  If she actually did not receive any of the money they agreed to, you can be sure she would have sued to collect.  --Yamla 15:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authorized?  

message: Hi,
I just added the link thehotelheiress.com which is the official 1 Night in Paris sex video site and it was removed again which makes no sense.
There is no need to classify it as spam at all since there is only one official download site for the tape. In my opinion you can start to delete all external links on all wiki pages since all links can - in any shape or form - be classified as spam or advertising.
In the case of 1 Night in Paris the link http://www.iafd.com/title.rme/title=1+Night+In+Paris/year=2004 contains advertising banners for other programs on the site which contain nudity - banners rotate so you have to refresh several times - and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0412260/ has an amazon shopping box on the right side. These links are very commercial and actually shouldn't be mentioned at all, too, yet they are allowed to stay but the official sex tape site not.
Please consider re-instating the link to thehotelheiress.com as it is right on the topic (that's what the whole page is actually about or not?) and not any nonsense which has nothing to do with it. I took the slogan "This pornographic film-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it" at the bottom serious and I think the link is quite a good supplement to the sparse link section and the article page in general. Consider it as an additional way for people visiting the wiki entries.
Thanks,
James Weinstein 10:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The site has a single purpose - to flog this crap - and contributes nothing. Linking to it is clearly spam, as described here . But I don't care enough to engage in a edit war, and I don't know why anyone else would --Angry mob mulls options 02:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links addendum removed - Why?

message: Is this for real? An entire section describing how the film goes, what he and she says, and what positions they try? There can be a plot, but this is... too much description and useless information. If no one give me a good reason why we should let that there, I'll clean it up and make the plot very brief. Kajito 16:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The plot section contains absolutely no plot and should be removed. The real plot is so short as to be given only a short mention. It goes something like this: Paris and Rick are bored and Rick convinces her to have sex on camera at his house, and again at a hotel. I consulted the first links at Google with the keywords "writing glossary plot" and "film glossary plot", and plot is about the organization of events and how they relate, not the details of the events in sequence; that is the story. There is nothing interesting or notable about the story. It's what you'd expect from amateur porno. So I'll take the initiative and remove it. 70.66.9.162 12:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Every film can have a plot and this is one of the biggetst selling fimm. A porn film article can also have a plot. see World's Biggest Gang Bang. We may edit it if we feel that it is too long but we should not remove it. 68.61.233.160 23:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

text: N/m I don't want to spend anymore time here. 70.66.9.162 11:26, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The "plot" is really unnecessary to detail as such.  This is rediculous.
(MarkpianoKC 06:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Good heavens.  The only reason anyone would read this entry is to find out "what happens" in the video.  Keep the "plot" in there.
--Andersonblog 22:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: thank you, andersonblog. jesus, i'm sick of this whole "Project: Make Wikipedia Boring". if i come upon wikipedia's article on "1 night in paris" and it doesn't tell me what occurs in the video, then what the hell is the point? -- monkeyboy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.215.83.206 (talk) 01:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: A detailed, scene-by-scene summary of events for a homemade porno?  Oh, you've got to be joking me.  This is written almost as poorly as tabloid article... Part of me died when I read "(It is also discovered at this point that Hilton's pubic hair is shaved.)"... I was half expecting it the article to start with a spoiler warning.  Sure, I'm all for porn, but this is Wikipedia, not Entertainment Tonight for horny 15-year-olds. That's just my opinion. --Zippo 22:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot 

message: Shouldn't the Plot section have a Spoiler Warning, as is usually the case with movies of any kind?--84.145.222.231 17:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No Spoiler Warning?

message: Romance? Drama? WTF? Is this really necessary or is someone having a laugh? Sion 16:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories. 

message: Is a line-by-line, unreferenced account of this video really necessary?  Maybe the video can just be linked to or something... anyway, I took it out and as a result this is now a stub :(  Milto LOL pia 07:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stub tiem 

message: :Image:Parisdvd2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:41, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Parisdvd2.jpg

message: The changelog message mentioned or which I assume stands for original research; but this was not.
--Argav ۞ 12:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Yes it does and yes it is. It is not supported by sources, violates WP:BLP, violates WP:NPOV and is unencyclopedic. Please do not replace it again. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 17:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restored the 'night vision' paragraph 

message: let's discuss the merger here. Which WP:RS sources do you mean provide significant coverage as per the WP:GNG? Please list them below in your reply. AadaamS (talk) 05:33, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge to Paris Hilton discussion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 1 Night in Paris. 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/20070202143817/http://www.eonline.com:80/news/article/index.jsp?uuid=dd1838b6-5852-4c89-9650-f7cdad9ec5fd to http://www.eonline.com/news/article/index.jsp?uuid=dd1838b6-5852-4c89-9650-f7cdad9ec5fd
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:15, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1 Night in Paris. 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/20100806005744/http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/girls/articles/2010-07/23/gq-girls-piers-morgan-interviews-paris-hilton/career to http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/girls/articles/2010-07/23/gq-girls-piers-morgan-interviews-paris-hilton/career
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) 11:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified