Talk:Para USA

Advertising
This strikes me as advertising.--OldCommentator 17:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Paras are not known for being "well engineered" - the steel that they use in all their parts is very soft around 16Rc which means that the parts are constantly breaking.--DavidW 16:07, 5 September 2006 (EST)


 * Para-Ordnance are world respected handguns. Read the reviews from third party magazines: Magazine reviews PianoKeys 19:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * yeah and the DB-9 got great reviews from 3rd party magazines, they just don't mention that it explodes with +p.Dreg102 16:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreg102 (talk • contribs)

This "article" is unsourced and appears to have been written by Para-Ordnance, or at least at its behest. Someone who knows a good bit about different firearms manufacturers need to write a more informative and objective article.

Parker 22:10, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Not sure which tag should be used for suspected advertising, but a POV tag should do for the time being. ThisIsRealPuma 11:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * This article was not written by Para-Ordnance. PianoKeys 19:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Para-Ordnance vs Para-USA
Does Para-Ordnance still exist or has it been replaced or merged with Para-USA? Our infobox includes weblinks for each, but both go to the same Para-USA website. I can't find much info on their website. The 2015 catalog mentions a 2013 "relaunch" but there's not a trace of Para-Ordnance or anything Canadian. Rezin (talk) 02:14, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * It took some digging but I found a 2012 article which says that "It was just a couple of years ago that Para Ordnance packed its bags in Canada and moved to North Carolina to become a totally U.S. company, Para USA." So it appears that the company has changed names. Given that fact, the article should be moved as well. And some rewriting, as the article currently implies there are two companies. Rezin (talk) 02:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Except for the URL, Para-USA.com, everything on the website and the 2014 and 2015 catolgs refers to "PARA", all caps, no "-USA". Based on what was done with "Glock", there's probably a rule against all-caps company names. Para is a disambiguation page, so I suppose this page should probably be Para (firearms), unless the common use of "Para-USA" is so strong it overrides the company's preference. Also, while this company is owned by the Freedom Group through at least a couple of layers of corporations and LLCs, it has the same CEO, George Kollitides. That'd mean co-founder Thanos Polyzos is out. Rezin (talk) 02:35, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * A 2014 press release refers to "Para USA, LLC" All of the recent press reports about the Liam Neeson thing seem to use "Para USA". I'll go with that. It's official and common. Rezin (talk) 02:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I've changed the lead just based on your posts, but I didn't change anything else. I don't know the first thing about guns, so I don't want to risk any misunderstandings about what guns Para-Ordnance made vs. what Para US is currently making. – Robin Hood  (talk)  03:42, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much - I ran out of time last night. You did a fine job. Rezin (talk) 17:21, 23 January 2015 (UTC)