Talk:Paris in the Twentieth Century

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Novels: 19th century Mid‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by 19th century task force.
	This article has an incomplete infobox template! - see Novels InfoboxCode or Short Story InfoboxCode for a pattern.

Found in 1989: really?

This page says: "In truth the whereabouts of the manuscript were known for many years, the story of the discovery was created as a marketing ploy."

Now, the current article offers no proof that it was REALLY found in 1989, and that page offers no proof that the discovery was just a marketing ploy. How should the article be modified?

Devil Master 13:48, 02 Sep 2005 (MET)

I've just greatly expanded this article, which was, in truth, a stub. To answer the charge above, I did some research on this book on Google, and found not one critic questioning it. The link provided above seems to be an unsubstantiated opinion, though many critics did say the book was "hyped" far beyond its true value, even though it was an important find. I also highly doubt a publisher would "sit" on an unpublished Jules Verne. Something like that is a guaranteed money-maker, and in fact was. Nhprman 21:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder also,some predictions in this book are too "accurate" to be true.May some ghost writer imitate Verne to conceive this one.Ksyrie 23:42, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A biography on Jules Verne on The History Channel included quite a bit of info about this book. It made reference to a letter from Verne's publisher at the time citing reasons why they didn't want to go ahead with the publication. I'll make some notes the next time it is shown and see if I can't expand upon what is already in the article. The impression I got from the bio was that the book was genuinely written by Verne as there seemed to be supporting period-evidence of the books existence.

Matthew king 15:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Public Domain?

Shouldn't this book be in the public domain like other works of Verne are? I couldn't find it on any online Verne library. 193.171.121.30 18:18, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The book was written in the 19th century, but it wasnt published until very recently, thus its copyright will still hold for the nexy century or so. 128.208.40.60 05:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Short version: The earliest version of the story (i.e. Verne's original manuscript) is public domain. The newly released editions and their translations may be copyrighted. Call me cynic, but I doubt the verbatim original manuscript text is available to the public in any form, public domain or not. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 22:44, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/15959/french-copyright-law-for-posthumous-works-a-book suggests, that the contents of the french version will join the public domain in 2019 or 2020; at least in france. The book was published more then 70 years after the authors death, thus the clause about 25 years after publication takes effect. 217.9.115.81 (talk) 07:25, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

'Worldwide communication network'

I doubt that Verne thought of the internet as such, when he talked about a 'Worldwide communication network', considering that the television had not yet been invented. I think it's more likely that Verne would have been thinking of some sort of worldwide telegraph network, or if he was being extra fanciful, perhaps some sort of worldwide gramophone network, whereby people could listen to other people's voices, anywhere in the world.

'Fax Machine'

The first concept of a fax machine was 1851, so it predated this book by a few years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tthackrey (talk • contribs) 18:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Louvre centerpiece

I think the characterization of the Louvre's centerpiece in Verne's novel as "geometric" and "modern" is inaccurate. Verne wrote:

"... Are there sculptors, at least? None whatsoever, ever since they planted the Muse of Industry right in the middle of the Louvre courtyard: a vigorous shrew crouching over some sort of cylinder, holding a viaduct on her knees, pumping with one hand, working a bellows with the other, a necklace of little locomotives around her neck, and a lightning rod in her chignon!"

This bears little resemblance to the modern abstract pyramid, and the suggestion that it does is misleading.

Cfscare (talk) 22:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've yanked both those sections, they were totally unreferenced and as bad as those lists of things Star Trek "predicted" get. Wow, Verne read about inventions and imagined ways they could be more widely applied and was right about some of them. Herr Gruber (talk) 07:58, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Michel Freezing to death

He didn't freeze to death. He merely collapsed in the snow (last line of the book)

TheKurgan (talk) 17:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for spoiling the story. Why else do you think someone would collapse in the snow? (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 00:52, 7 July 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Exhaustion? Collapsing can just mean fainting. Herr Gruber (talk) 07:58, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The public domain date

I don't known why this book is still not in public domain. Could You explain it more? http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/List_of_countries%27_copyright_length_based_on_publication_and_creation_dates states that this is in public domain, even in USA or UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.68.103.25 (talk) 12:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanted to be sure, you should have looked at a more accurate and authoritative source than Wikipedia. Copyright is based on the year of first publication if the work was unpublished during the life of the author. Since this was only published a few years ago, the copyright is still going. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 00:55, 7 July 2012 (UTC))[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Paris in the Twentieth Century. 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/20090213163418/http://andresvaccari.net/1998/04/05/paris-in-the-twentieth-century/ to http://andresvaccari.net/1998/04/05/paris-in-the-twentieth-century

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) 10:53, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]