Talk:1 Night in Paris
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Picture
This article needs many! JimRaynor 15:12, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Settle down there James. --Lord Voldemort 13:17, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Don't get out of character. JimRaynor 16:50, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keeping you under control is all part of my evil plan. --Lord Voldemort 19:06, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- You should have apparated a nuclear bomb into the ministry of magic and then set it off. JimRaynor 19:11, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Well the reason I didn't was because... well, I never... well, I should have gotten... well, well, shut up. That simply would not have been evil enough. --Lord Voldemort 19:43, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I'll help you out here LV. There are two reasons he couldn't have done this. First, wizards don't use Muggle technology. Therefore, a nuke is out from the start. Second, Hogwarts was described (in one of the books) as a non-apparation zone. If these can be set up, surely the Ministry of Magic has one (or at least now that they're openly at war with He Who Has a Silly Name.
- *giggle!* --^pirate 16:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Well the reason I didn't was because... well, I never... well, I should have gotten... well, well, shut up. That simply would not have been evil enough. --Lord Voldemort 19:43, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- You should have apparated a nuclear bomb into the ministry of magic and then set it off. JimRaynor 19:11, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keeping you under control is all part of my evil plan. --Lord Voldemort 19:06, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Don't get out of character. JimRaynor 16:50, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] the name
What does the name of the movie mean? Is it "One night inside Paris Hilton" or "One night in Paris, France"?
- Dude, its called "1 night IN Paris" featuring a skanky whore named Paris. You'd think you would be able to figure it out from the title and content alone. Lordhart 21:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's a double meaning, since you could spend a night in Paris, but it's actually referring to Paris Hilton - 71.234.29.231 07:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Oh, come on, get on with it! It's a pun, and means one night inside of her. One things for sure, she didn't come up with the title. It's too witty for the socialite. Aaрон Кинни (t) 17:51, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Authorized?
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)
This article needs more [citation needed] s. A couple of sentences didn't have one --Angry mob mulls options 12:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] External Links addendum removed - Why?
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)
- 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)
[edit] Again: Link to its official website
Once again: The link is an official link to the website and is 110% right on topic of the article!!
To some of you: You can't expect that others always have the same opinion like you and you should also start to accept and respect contributions from others.
The link will be put up again, I don't have to repeat that it is an OFFICIAL link to the video. The whole article is about a porn video, guys! I don't have to remind you that the 1 Night in Paris article is a *porn* stub and contributions are more welcome than on "normal" article pages.
Furthermore, I don't have to remind you, that the whole article is "pornographic"! Just read thru it, it even contains "porn" language. If you or anyone else feel offended by a link to its official site then please, please delete the whole pornographic article or stop this ridiculous hypocrisy!
Thanks!
James Weinstein 11:19, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
addendum:
Please delete both links from the article: the one to the internet movie database contains an Amazon shopping cart and a large ad banner on their website. The other one linking to the adult film database contains ad banners at the top for buying adult movies etc. Those 2 links (and in general ALL links on wiki which lead to the IMDB and ALL movie articles on wiki have external links to them) are commercial and are of no encyclopedic value at all either.
Weinstein 11:44, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
--> that's definitely not my company or link and I guarantee it :-) We are talking here about the official site to the article's subject.(which by the way is not an article by me even) You seem to either naively forget or deny it. A weak and futile counterargument... Again, if you feel offended by this article and topic's content then look for another hobby. You can't expect that everybody has the same opinion like you do.
But thanks for the link which proves that even commercial sites are allowed on wiki, quite contrary to what most wikipedians think or or think to know.
Quote from the site above: "Links to commercial sites are often appropriate"
Here are also another interesting links:
I'd like to politely remind that repeatedly deleting/reverting edits by other users is a breach of Template:3RR and WP:3RR respectively. James Weinstein 18:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Again, if you feel offended by this article and topic's content then look for another hobby lol it's strawman city. It's not about the subject matter of the article, but the link spam - which I see you've been warned about by an admin previously http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Weinstein&oldid=89685152, you're fortunate not to have been blocked by now.
How can an official link to the topic's article or matter be considered as link spam, please?? That shows that YOU ARE offended by it, else you would just accept it. Period. Thanks for admitting it. If this material is offending in your country doesn't mean it's in other countries.
If the official website doesn't belong to that article (which would be a new mile stone in wiki history) then please delete the whole article from wiki since your arguments are plain ridiculuos and I don't need you trying to make a fool out of me Mr. Anonymous! Weinstein 11:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
How to identify spam and spammers
- User has made multiple edits to related articles
- The majority of user's edits are to external links sections
- Link is trying to sell a product or service.
If you type paris hilton in google, you will find hundreds of so called OFFICIAL WEBSITES. That does not mean that all those should be added to wikipedia. stop spamming.
Dude, you are such a liar and fact twister, unbelievable! Google will NOT show you hundreds of official sites. There is only one official site of Paris Hilton and only one official site of the Paris Hilton sex tape which is http://www.thehotelheiress.com - We are talking here about the sex tape and not about Paris Hilton sites in general, but you know that...
And NO, not hundreds sites shall be added to the link section but only one which is the most appropriate and is 100% on the article's topic but which you cannot or don't want to see.
Now stop twisting facts and spreading lies. And next time sign your posts when you talk to someone! Weinstein 22:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)