This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Firearms Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms 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.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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) reply

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) reply

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) reply

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

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. [1] 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. [2] Rezin ( talk) 02:14, 23 January 2015 (UTC) reply

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." [3] 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) reply

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) reply

A 2014 press release refers to "Para USA, LLC" [4] 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) reply

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) reply

Thank you so much - I ran out of time last night. You did a fine job. Rezin ( talk) 17:21, 23 January 2015 (UTC) reply