"
 Enough with the ad hominems, please address the points made which are relevant to the article. Don't distract yourself from the collective efforts to bring this discussion back on track.   

Restoring WP:NPOV to the Paris article

I invite everyone to read again the WP:NPOV policy of Wikipedia:
Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view. NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects. This policy is nonnegotiable and all editors and articles must follow it.

Currently, the article is heavily biased towards a historical/heritage representation of Paris. The article is structured the same way as the article of Pompeii with most of its contents dedicated to describe past History, heritage sites, tourism, and past culture. The difference with Pompeii though is Paris hasn't been destroyed by a volcano 2,000 years ago, and here goes the WP:POV.

Facts about what is Paris today are marginalized in shrinked sections burried at the bottom. For the good of the debate, here are some facts about today's Paris we should all remember. Economically speaking, Paris is among the top 5 cities generating the most wealth in the world, it hosts more headquarters of Fortune Global 500 firms than London or New York. Demographically speaking, it is a megapolis of 12 million people inhabitated by large communities coming from all countries in the world. Regarding infrastructures, it is one of the most important transport node in Europe, with 4 airports, 6 major railway stations linked to 4 different high-speed rail lines, and hosts the second largest river port in Europe.

To know whether or not the economics, demographics and infrastructures aspects of Paris are represented fairly, proportionately in the current article, I invite everyone to compare the size of the said sections with the one of those dedicated to History, heritage and culture (which in the case of Paris ignores its modern aspects as everyone obviously agreed here ). I've counted words of each section (including their paragraphs in introduction), and in order to give a point of comparison, I've done the same about London, which is a similar size capital city of a similar country.
Field of interestParisLondonNumber of words% of totalNumber of words% of totalHistory3,573 words22%2,048 words17%Heritage4,277 words26%204 words2%Culture2,545 words15%1,661 words14%Subtotal10,395 words63%3,913 words32%Economy673 words4%727 words6%Demographics852 words5%1,605 words13%Transport819 words5%1,693 words14%Subtotal2,344 words13%4,025 words33%Overall total16,388 words100%12,131 words100%
It's worth being mentionned though that London's culture section is entirely dedicated to today's culture. But even putting that aspect aside, the London article, which seems well-balanced, talk about as much of History, heritage and culture than it does of economy, demographics and transports. In the case of Paris, sections about the ""past"" aspects are 4.5 times bigger than those about today's aspect. In reading this article, we can decently believe that today's Paris is judged not relevant any