Talk:Mines of Paris

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mines of Paris article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

France: Paris Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Paris task force.

Mining

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Article expansion

I expanded the article a bit, wrote an intro that was missing, and added a section about the catacombs linking to the main article. The article could be expanded further with the history of the network in the 19th and 20th century, and a section on cataphiles also linking to the main article.

I am also tempted to suggest a move to Quarries of Paris, through maybe slightly improper, it would match what they are known as in French more closely (carrières de Paris) and for that reason a more likely translation. Equendil Talk 14:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Language

Perhaps because of the sources used, some areas of the article seem to me not totally clear and/or show a strong influence of the French original on the text. I have made a couple of changes, but there are parts I can't change due to not understanding them, e.g. the monks "continued the exploitation of stone to the ancient mine's extremities" does this mean they were mining? Lord Spring Onion (talk) 19:58, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The text style is slightly idiosyncratic, but totally grammatical and coherent. In fact, it's a beautifully written article: I turned here to see if it had ever been proposed for GA review. --Old Moonraker (talk) 08:52, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What - you like it? I'm sure it could use some work (a lot of the writing is mine and I'm sure the language is wonky in places). I could sure as h*ll use some help, at least a second opinion… but thanks! THEPROMENADER 22:29, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

length of galleries

Content in the lead formerly said ""Together, the mines and galleries run for approximately 280 kilometres (170 mi)."

The number was changed to 640 today in this dif with edit note "I changed it to 640 km of tunnels because that's what I've seen from other sites"

The original content was a) unsourced and b) no where in the body, so it should not have been here at all. "other sites" are not reliable sources; when we get a reliable source for this, the content with its source should go into the body, and then it can be added back to the lead. Jytdog (talk) 15:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, without WP:RS it should be removed for now. Reify-tech (talk) 20:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There were 300km of hallways in 1908, the date of publication for Emile Gérards' "Paris Souterrain". I'm sure that there's been several extentions/eliminations since then (metro, filling hallways with concrete to support new constructions, etc.), but that's the best source I have for now. I'll have a look on the IGC website later though. Cheers. THEPROMENADER 07:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]