Talk:Paris, Texas

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Mid-importance).

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Parisites Vs. Parisians

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

This page should not have been moved

This page should not have been moved without discussion. I have changed Paris, Texas (USA) to a redirect here. Both the movie and presumably the band take there name from the city. Therefore the city is the primary use of Paris, Texas and should remain here. I have moved the disambig page to Paris, Texas (disambiguation). -JCarriker 01:13, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Racism

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)[reply]

How does this distinguish Paris, Texas from other communities throughout America? Just because someone wrote about it in a newspaper article doesn't make it a legitimate reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomAdelstein (talk • contribs) 17:04, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bestselling author, you can look it up on Google. My first book went public in 1985. I have 17 titles. I've lived all over the damn place - this country and others.

THIS IS RACIAL IN AND OF ITSELF. You think there's racism in Paris, you haven't been out and about. More racism in Miami, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Dallas, Amman Jordan and so forth.

Whoever thinks this is worth mention has a personal issue with the town and it's unfair to the rest of us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomAdelstein (talk • contribs) 16:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Parisites

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

No matches for 'parisite' or 'parisian' (including plural forms) on the web site for Paris Junior College. --Zippy 22:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Edits from Anonymous User 66.76.72.25

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

I notice the name "Henry Smith" doesn't appear in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.33.158.121 (talk) 23:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies

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)[reply]

Lynchings

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)[reply]

I agree. Someone edited this page to disparage the community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomAdelstein (talk • contribs) 17:01, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. It is part of Paris' history - albeit an unpleasant one. Additionally, some of the aspects of this seem problematic - in particular, the unfortunate Mr. Henry is given an 1876 birth date and his death is given as in 1893, which would have made him 17 years old at the time. It doesn't quite pass the smell test that he would have been both a "known alcoholic" and have a stepson at the age of 17. Perhaps this should be given a second look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hbrednek (talk • contribs) 14:53, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Using racism to describe a town typifies identity politics. I might understand the relevance if an active chapter of an alt-right group paraded downtown to cheers of crowds. TThe latter doesn't happen. Including specific incidents to brand 25,000 people disrespects the residents as a whole.

The relationship between Butler and Smith has to be confused. It says a 17-year-old had a stepson with a reputation as an upstanding citizen. Could the relationship between these two have been accidentally reversed? RichardBond (talk) 06:01, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A 17-year-old had a stepson. Really?

RE: "It's Paris' History" - maybe you should edit every city that existed before segregation ended in the US. People play the race card because they know it gets attention and the player has a hidden agenda. Problematic? A death that allegedly occurred in 1893? I submit that it has little to do with the events relevant to a researcher of Paris Tx in 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomAdelstein (talk • contribs) 17:42, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Racism

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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 [[1]], or the Huffington Post article [2], or even the internal Wikipedia articles about the Detroit race riots here [[3]]. 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Keep the content, add the update with citations.Athene cunicularia (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked to give my two cents.

I think racism is notable, when it occurs, and even sometimes when it merely is "alleged" to occur.

As long as the article is neutral about all controversial aspects of the incident, it should go in. We don't want to have bland, trivial articles but useful ones. --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, this section is worthless and meant to hold the community hostage. I have no trouble with most of the Paris, TX article. If you think it's notable, give us some comparable stats from the rest of the US. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomAdelstein (talk • contribs) 16:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

any songs about Paris, Texas?

List of songs about Paris
Shadowy 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)[reply]

"Is" vs. "was" part of history

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

The Simpsons

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)[reply]

"Eiffel Tower Replica" section

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)[reply]

Whitewashing of history.

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)[reply]

External links modified

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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:25, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Software lists

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)[reply]

Formatting of Race Relations section

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)[reply]

Best Magician Ever

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)[reply]

Why is Beaver's Bend listed as a local attraction?

Beaver's Bend Resort Park is sixty miles away across the Oklahoma state line. Becalmed (talk) 04:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]