Jump to content

Talk:Toronto

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Randella (talk | contribs) at 23:19, 27 April 2016 (Problematic population ranking). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please review WP:CANSTYLE before posting here; Toronto is the capital of Ontario and Ottawa is the capital of Canada

Template:Vital article

Former good articleToronto was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 9, 2006Good article nomineeListed
July 16, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 5, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article


Little Italy

"Developed in the early 1900s, Little Italy is one of the city's oldest extant ethnic neighbourhoods.

Well Little was never "developed" it happened as with all ethnic groups. Also little Italy as you see it today is not the same little italy...it wasn't even really called Little Italy ...until it was made over in the mid 1990s, when the bulk of the Italians that lived there since the 60's moved to Maple. Little Italy is a marketed BIA and not a living community of Italians....like how no Indians live on "Gerrard" or what they call little India now.Starbwoy (talk) 19:28, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The original Little Italy was "The Ward." Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 15:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inner suburb/ Outer suburb

Actually the term Inner suburb has only been in use in Toronto since mid 2007 or later, and what is written here is totally wrong. I checked the term and areas listed under New York (as I also know New York). The term doesn't exactly match Toronto because most of low population population explosion which didn't happen until the mid 1950s unlike older cities. the inner suburbs of toronto are the cities and boroughs that used to make up Metro toronto. The outer suburbs are the cities and towns that rim the Former Metro toronto.

Inner suburb North york, Scarborough, East York, York, Etobicoke

Outer suburbs Mississauga, Vaughn, Markham, Pickering, Ajax, Brampton, Oakville etc,Starbwoy (talk) 19:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no official definition of these terms - the meaning is usually contextual. In some contexts, your view would make sense. But this is an article about the City of Toronto, not the GTA, and the text in question is distinguishing the early bedroom suburbs that largely developed pre-WWII from the suburbs whose growth was primarily post-WWII. That's a logical use of the terms, and one I have seen used. Given there is no official definition, I wouldn't be so quick to label any interpretation "totally wrong". Having said that, we should perhaps consider using different terminology, so as not to cause confusion with different contexts. As one final note, unclear how usage of the terms in NYC is relevant.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:20, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes, Etobicoke, North York, and Scarborough are collectively referred to as the outer 416. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 01:33, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2015

The third line of the entry currently reads: "The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is the most populous metropolitan area in Canada, with 5,583,064 people living in the census metropolitan area as of 2011."

Because the preceding line notes that the city is the fourth most populous city in North America, the line should be edited to read: "The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is the most populous metropolitan area in Canada and the eighth largest in North America, with 5,583,064 people living in the census metropolitan area as of 2011."

The words "eighth largest in North America should be linked to List of North American metropolitan areas by population.

74.15.165.237 (talk) 23:40, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 02:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Because Canada, the United States, and Mexico each have drastically different definitions of what a 'metropolitan area' is, I don't think that including the fact that Toronto is the "eight largest metropolitan area in North America" is warranted in this article. For city population, the definition is universal in that it is the total population within city limits. In Canada, the area that is considered a 'metropolitan area' for statistical purposes is much smaller than what would be considered a metropolitan area in the United States.
From Wikipedia : "Unlike the United States, the methodology used by Statistics Canada does not allow for CMA-CMA mergers into larger statistical areas as the US does to form Combined Statistical Areas. If such an approach was utilized, Statistics Canada has stated that Toronto, Oshawa and Hamilton could be merged into a single CSA. Statistics Canada has described the Greater Golden Horseshoe as the country's largest urban area."
For example, the Chicago Metropolitan area for statistical purposes covers an area of (10,856 sq mi) 28,120 km2, while the Toronto metropolitan area for statistical purposes covers an area of just 2,750.65 sq mi (7,124.15 km2). If defined by U.S. methodology, the Golden Horseshoe would be included in the Toronto metropolitan area and would cover an area of 31,561.57 km2 (12,185.99 sq mi) and have a population of 8,759,312.

JPark99 (talk) 19:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic population ranking

The article currently reads that Toronto is the fourth-largest city in North America (behind NYC, LA, Mexico City), with 2,615,000 residents. Chicago had more residents than this in the official 2010 Census (2,695,598) and continues to have more residents with subsequent estimates (2,722,389 last year).

How does Toronto rank higher than Chicago? By all estimates, the city of Chicago is larger, which would make Toronto the fifth-largest in North America. Can somebody explain why editors appear to be protective of this incorrect "fourth place" ranking?"

Geogrphr (talk) 18:43, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I think I can answer my own question. The Toronto ranking is being pulled from another list that is using a more recent estimate instead. The problem here, then, is that the article keeps citing the 2011 estimate for its population figure. We simply need to change the sentence so that we are not saying 2,615,000 people is the "fourth-highest." The whole population field also needs to point to the 2014 estimates instead.

Geogrphr (talk) 18:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Our rule on Wikipedia is that the Canada 2011 Census remains the most important population figure until such time as the 2016 Canada Census is released. Intercensal estimates may be cited, if properly sourced, as supplementary data to the five-year census number, but may never simply replace the 2011/2016 data outright. This is because the 2011/2016 censuses are the only figures that are comprehensively broken down for precise demographic detail, as well as the only figures that exist comprehensively for all Canadian cities and towns (as opposed to existing only for a specific and defined set of the major cities, as intercensal updates do.) So a 2014 or 2015 number may be added to the article as additional "update since 2011" data — but the 2011 figure may not be completely disappeared from the article or the infobox until the results of the 2016 census are released. Bearcat (talk) 23:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly agree with Bearcat on this. @Geogrphr: please refer to here: WP:CANSTYLE. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 01:59, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
i agree the population sentence is at best, confusing. we should not be stating the official population figure from 2011 and then stating a ranking that was not true at the time. i'm going to break it into two sentences to make it clearer. that way, the official population figure will be clearly stated and the more recent estimates and ranking will also be present. sound fair? Randella (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on Toronto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:02, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Climate

I have made some major changes in the climate section since much of it is completely unsourced. It was one of the main reasons that this article was delisted as a good article. It's been there for a couple of years although it hasn't been fixed in terms of adding in the required citations to back up these claims. Ssbbplayer (talk) 03:10, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 16 external links on Toronto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:32, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Renominate this article as GA?

It would be a good time to go over this article, so that it could be renominated as GA. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 03:42, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I just did a quick read over the article but I have not checked the sources in detail.
  1. Uncited paragraphs and lack of sufficient inline citations. This is the big issue. Certain paragraphs and sentences in the history, topography, neighbourhoods, Old Toronto, Suburbs, Industrial, Public Spaces, Tourism, Education, Airports, Road System are problematic. This would fail criteria 2.
  2. Neutrality is okay so that is not an issue. I don't see any bias.
  3. I do not think there is any problems regarding the images.
  4. The lead section needs a bit of tweaking. The lead section is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the article, but in this article it mentions all sorts of things by way of background that are not in the body of the text. See Manual of Style/Lead section. For instance certain citations such "is the most populous city in Canada", "the most populous metropolitan area in Canada" are used only once. My suggestion would be to incorporate these statements somewhere within the article so that the lead section just summarizes this.
I think that is all I have found. I hope this helps. At the same, try putting this article to Peer review to obtain comments from other users. As well, a request for copyediting from the Guild of Copy Editors is good as they will copyedit the article shortly after nomination without waiting for long. These 2 really helped me when I promoted one of my articles to GA. Ssbbplayer (talk) 05:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found today two mistakes today and did not take time to really read the article. (york garrison, capital of UC from 1793) I think it needs a fair amount of work. Nowhere near enough citations. Alaney2k (talk) 18:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Climate

I will add back the 2001-2012 averages as they are relevant in reflecting the latest temp. data available from a reliable source (Environment Canada.)

In regards to it being synthesis, etc. it is not, as the averages for each relevant period are listed in the raw data (on the bottom, where it says Avg.). None of this requires any manual calculations, as the output numbers are all in the database.

To verify, one can simply extract the .CSVs for each year and check (no calculations or additional assumptions required.) Finally, plenty of good/starred articles use this approach (having raw data with stated averages) for climate data, including London, Washington DC, etc.--Therexbanner (talk) 20:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Toronto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Toronto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:26, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]