Talk:Paris

Talk:Paris
Former good articleParis was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 21, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 12, 2006Good article nomineeListed
July 5, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
March 25, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
September 19, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
July 7, 2013Good article nomineeListed
November 5, 2014Good article reassessmentDelisted
April 5, 2017Good article nomineeListed
September 23, 2025Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 25, 2004.
Current status: Delisted good article

GA Reassessment

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:21, 23 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

As noted on the talkpage, this is a very extensive article that includes within that extent unsourced text. Even within the apparently sourced text, there are issues, for example the Regional government source does not cover all its text. Other issues include the recent history section entering WP:PROSELINE, other areas having similar dated statements, and the overall article going into MOS:OVERSECTION. The WP:LEAD contains unique information rather than being a summary of the article. The length (>14,000 words) suggests this article does not "stay focused", and contributes to issues such as the unsourced text and the oversectioning. These issues would take significant work to fix. CMD (talk) 03:04, 17 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

This article was pretty lengthy when I last looked at it, and is now considerably lengthier. I don't mind that too much at GA level (quite another matter at FAC) but unsourced additions are another matter and decidedly a no-no. Tim riley talk 13:49, 17 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
@CMD, Tim riley: I have tried to fix WP:PROSELINE and the lead (although it probably should be rewritten); I'll try to fix the other issues soon. The article is probably a bit too long, but not by a lot: Boston (FA) contains just under 10,000 words, while Paris contains just over 14,000. Some of the difference is probably because there are more things to write about (as the capital city of France); I have proposed the "Culture" and "Infrastructure" sections to be split. Alpha Beta Delta Lambda (talk) 18:06, 26 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Progress for cleanup by section (for my convenience):
Section Progress Comment
Lead  Not done Needs to be rewritten.
Etymology  Done Can't see any citation problem (if there is please tag it).
History  Not done Q few claims need citation, some claims probably need to be moved to History of Paris, a claim needs to be clarified.
Geography  Done Sourced and enough coverage.
Administration  Not done A paragraph without cite, there are probably more claims without reference.
Cityscape  Not done Several claims without cite.
Demographics Maybe done It appears well sourced but haven't thoroughly checked yet.
Economics
Education
Culture  Not done Probably needs split and actually needs to address the culture of the city.
Sport mostly done Spin-off from the culture section, mostly sourced but the Rugby League part may need some more.
Infrastructure  Not done Probably needs a split, and if not OVERSECTION needs to be addressed. Also there are some claims without sources.
International relations  Not done Needs some sources and cleanup, but not an overhaul.
Alpha Beta Delta Lambda (talk) 13:54, 27 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Louvre

should this be explicitly in the lede, as well as the infobox. Crookesmoor (talk) 20:08, 3 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Major centre since the 17th century

From the last sentence of the first paragraph: "Paris has been one of the world's major centres of finance, diplomacy, commerce, culture, fashion, and gastronomy since the 17th century." First of all, I don't see this discussed anywhere in the article or in the cited source. Second, it's actually contradicted in the Fashion section, which says "Since the 19th century, Paris has been an international fashion capital", with a source citation. GA-RT-22 (talk) 09:28, 3 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Flag of Paris in 2026

Flag of Paris in 2026.

In 2025, they have adopted a new flag of Paris bc is weird and really weird GeniusElephant678 (talk) 10:46, 22 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.