Talk:The Paris Review

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Literature

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

List of contributors

Some comments:

The list of contributors is FAR too long, being an eye-glazing blur of links. Settle on those that are most representative of the magazine.

Giving prominent mention to one nutbar conspiracy-theory writer's charges gives them an importance they don't deserve, even to rebut. The whole Controversy section should be terminated, with extreme prejudice, unless some objective evidence of Cummings's charge is provided. --Calton 02:19, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No argument from me

Thanks for your comments. Please note that this is my first attempt to overhaul a Wikipedia page, so I'm learning as I go - trying very hard to do most of it in "preview" mode, but ...

The Cummings guy is obviously coming from left field (as it were), but he has overriden previous deletions of his claims (see editing history). So the best move seemed to be to move the whole mess down to a separate section and add some, uh, qualifiers. I am in truth right there with you on wanting to "terminate with extreme prejudice."

As for the list of contributors, yeah, you're right, it's long. A comprehensive list, on the other hand, would run into the thousands. And I was trying to avoid just the usual suspects (Baldwin, Capote, Rich, Mailer ... ). It seemed more interesting to include "outsiders," less-known women poets, regional writers, young experimental writers. That said, I'll repeat, you're right, it's long. Would welcome suggested cuts.

- Tamsin, who doesn't yet have a user page, 5 Feb 2005 (don't have UTC)

This page claims that Marina Tsvetaeva was interviewed by the Paris Review. According to her Wikipedia page, she died in 1941, and, according to this page, the Paris Review was founded in 1953.

-Please note that Cummings allegations were confirmed in the NY Times story of January 13, 2007; and indeed, confirmed by co-founder Peter Matthiessen himself, who has admitted that the Paris review was founded entirely by CIA money. If you read the Times article, you'll see that current editor Philip Gourevitch admits that the CIA background of the magazine was common knowledge in their office. This is an extremely important story for the light it throws on the past fifty years of American literary history.

It seems that the Times piece only says that Mathiessen was a CIA recruit in 1953 (not too long after the birth of the agency, right?) and that his work with the Paris Review was a cover. It seems like calling the magazine a "cover" means that the magazine itself was not a tool of the CIA, but rather an alibi for Mathiessen while he was doing other, presumably less harmless things. Also note: "disseminating disinformation in the form of literary criticism" can't be correct, because the Paris Review has never published criticism, only interview, poetry, and fiction. Not sure if this whole thing--fascinating though it is--belongs as the first sentence either . . . but I'm hesitant to make changes myself. Jbalias 20:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct heading

Since the title of the magazine is The Paris Review, the heading should be changed to match. Pepso 20:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ULA Allegation

Allegation by the ULA that the The Paris Review was "exercising influence" over the London Review of Books is addressed in a blog post by a former editor based in London. At this link:

http://themainpoint.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/paris-review-at-beginning-and-now.html

Delicious as that allegation may be it's unsupported and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MyComment3 (talk • contribs) 17:43, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cover images

There's no need to keep replacing the cover images, which have been too large to meet the WP:NFCC anyway. I'm reverting to File:The Paris Review Issue 202.jpg, which I recently resized. -- Trevj (talk) 08:10, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for ensuring the most recent upload at least respects the size guidance for non-free content. However, I don't see any good reason to keep replacing cover images. This is an encyclopedia, not a showcase for the latest issue of magazines, per WP:NOTPROMOTION. I think it would be a more productive use of people's time to focus on building content instead. Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 09:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In line with the above, I'm replacing the ever-changing cover image with a picture of issue 1, File:The Paris Review cover issue 1.jpg. In the absence of reasonable arguments otherwise, it's suggested that this remain the stable version within this article, per WP:NOTPROMOTION. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 14:11, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews in The Paris Review

Interviews may now be published as "Writers at Work," but, notably, they earned their fame as "The Art of Fiction." I don't know how to properly format this correction, but this fact can be easily verified, as the entire series is archived online. (Also visible in the documentary "Plimpton!")

John Train

Not sure how to link, but John Train, one of the co-founders of the Paris Review is not hyperlinked under history.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/John_Train_(investment_advisor) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.238.113.37 (talk) 02:39, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Paris Review. 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) 11:41, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A.N. Devers piece on Brigid Hughes

Just was reading about this this morning- very interesting read on the timing and motives behind editing some of the content of this page. Editing articles about living people and events can be a minefield and requires more scrutiny. https://longreads.com/2017/12/15/this-is-how-a-woman-is-erased-from-her-job/

Why Paris

I came here hoping to read something about why the magazine was founded in Paris Doceddi (talk) 17:28, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inquiey

Please tell me how I can get my work published in this magazine. Birbal Kumawat (talk) 17:08, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]