Talk:Montreal/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



Why is it that the demographic data on the language of the city is one of the metropolitan area of Montreal and not the city per se ( the island of Montreal ). I'm not sure that francophones would still be in majority because the combined anglophone/allophone population of the island of Montreal is very near to that of the francophones. The problem is that at this point I don't have precise numbers on that given the fact that the mergers actually happened after the 01 Census. I do feel that data presented on wikipedia is unclear and may be missleading because we have some places in Montreal where French is virtually not spoken at all, the place that I live in has an over 90 % of anglophone/allophone households. The point is that the population of the French speaking Montreal should not be overestimated in the article vis-a-vis the anglophone/allophone population. VicFromTheBlock

When talking about the population of a metropolis, it is common matter to consider its neighborhood areas. The combination of a city and its suburbs is called a metropolitan area (or metro area). For example, when commonly said that Paris has a population of about 10 millions, it includes people from a large area around the city limits, the population of the city of Paris itself being about 2-3 millions. The Island of Montréal, which includes the city itself and a few suburbs, is composed of about 55% French-speaking and 45% English/Allophone-speaking people. However, the suburbs (the "450" and some parts of "514"), which include nearly half of the population of the metro area, are composed of French-speaking people at about 75-80%, which give a realistic average of about 2.5 million "native" French-speaking people in Montréal (metro area), more than any other city in the world except Paris. As for Abidjan and Kinshasa, even if the total population of these cities is larger than of Montréal, a large proportion of their residents practically speak local dialects which have few or nothing to do which French language. I updated the article according to these facts. Emcy
In the demographics section of the article, the demographics of both the Metropolitan Area and the Island of Montreal are listen. Obviously, both are important. The metro area is one thing, the island itself is another. The demographics of the Island give a clearer picture of what we think of as "Montreal". The metropolitan area includes places off the island, which we generally look at as being not-quite Montreal. By having both, we give people a good picture of both ways of looking at the city.--Larineso 15:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Francophone cities

I remember reading a few years back that Montreal had fallen to 3rd largest francophone city, after Paris and Kinshasa, Zaire, which is given here as having a pop of 4.5 million, considerably larger than Montreal's. But are they all francophone? (Montreal's population certainly isn't.) zadcat 16:26 Sep 5, 2002 (PDT)

Is Kinshasa's? user:Montrealais
Well, the demographics page about the DR Congo (Zaire) says French is the official language, and the page about Kinshasa gives its population as 4.5 million. It's probably on a par with Montreal, at least. zadcat
French is also Quebec's official language. FWIW, Kinshasa says that the lingua franca of the city is Lingala, not French. - Montréalais

Dude... It's not because certain areas of Monatal are *not* Frenchs that make Monateral a 'non-francophone' city. It is because certain areas of Montreal have seen an aggregation of like-minded cultures that make this burg a cosmopolite city.

What make all these people from all sorts of different locals come here? Exactly because not only is MTL a French & English speaking city, but also because MTL is an open-minded place to live ena breath.

Please read my post in the Demographics section above about this subject. Emcy

Montreal, Quebec versus Montreal

When did this get moved from Montreal, Quebec? I thought the understanding was that all US and Canadian cities article titles would include the state/province. -- Zoe

It has always been at Montreal, and considering that there's a redirect, I think we can leave it here by virtue of its prominence. - Montréalais


Should the neighbourhoods really be in the syntax Côte-des-Neiges, Quebec? I think this sort of gives the impression that they are, or recently were, separate cities. Although Plateau Mont-Royal has no Quebec on it...

By the way, , thank you for all your work on the suburbs and historical figures. - Montréalais

I'm not sure about the syntax. I thought it would be preferable to simply Côte-des-Neiges, although I think Rosemont is the only nieghbourhood where it would be stricly necessary. Rivière des Prairies, Quebec and Pointe-aux-Trembles, Quebec are cetainly the right form, since both are seperate postal districts from Montreal. The Plateau I left as is because it seems more like a discriptive name than the name of town.


Montreal is a major port city, being at the mouth of the Saint Lawrence Seaway which links it to the industrial centres of the Great Lakes. As the most important port in Canada, it is a transshipment point for grain, sugar, petroleum products, machinery, and consumer goods. For this reason, it is part of the railway backbone of Canada and has always been an extremely important rail city.

The Vancouver Port Authority claims to be the largest port in Canada with over $30-billion Canadian in goods each year. The Port of Montreal website ( has very detailed information on cargo volume, but I can't find information on value. Either way, it doesn't challenge Vancouvers claim.

Perhaps "most important port in Eastern Canada" would work better? Or "most important port on Canada's east coast" -- stewacide 03:31, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)


This page needs some cleaning up. I tried a little bit. We should seriously think about using a template.

fvincent 07:24, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)

See also

The "see also" list should be relatively limited, to topics strongly related to Montreal as a whole (list of cities in Canada, etc.), not to events that simply happened in Montreal. Otherwise the "see also" list could be very long indeed, including links to Expo 67, the 1976 Olympics, the Expos baseball club, the Montreal Canadiens hockey team and so forth. On the other hand, such events would fit into a "timeline" page or section... some other cities have them, see for instance Dallas. P.T. Aufrette 20:08, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)


Seems like some mention should be made of various cultural happenings. Particularly the Montreal Jazz Festival and the international fireworks competition, but I suppose the Nuits d'Afrique, the Pride Parade, and the Just For Laughs festival deserve mention too. Perhaps also the Tam Tam jam, not necessarily because it's of international interest (although tourists should see it) but because it's interesting in being self-organized. I don't know where these sorts of things would fit into the entry (or whether they're worth including). I think they're cool, but I live here. --Andrew 09:02, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)

You can come and improve Culture of Quebec#Events if you know of these events. There is also a List of Quebec festivals which doesn't yet have a lot of articles to point to. Mathieugp 12:47, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hmm. Both good articles (at least in principle). How much of their content should be duplicated in this article? --Andrew 13:39, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)

You mean in the Montreal article? Not sure. I think it's OK if some of it is duplicated. We should try to have it worded differently though. :-) Mathieugp 14:13, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Winter images

Does someone who lives here have some arctic-wasteland pictures of Montreal to post in the weather section? I discovered, to my astonishment, that I have none. One of the mountain in summer would be good, too, to balance our ch'i. --Andrew 03:00, May 5, 2004 (UTC)

Tell you what: I will have some in about three months, if you can wait. ^_^ - Montréalais 16:04, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Street names

copied from User talk:Mirv

This wiki uses french terms for Montreal streets in the middle of English sentences. This is just wierd. Nobody says "It's at the corner of rue University and boulevard René-Lévesque." You should use English terms on an English website. -

  1. The articles are placed under Marie-Reine-du-Monde Cathedral, not Cathedral of Mary, Queen of the World; Notre-Dame de Montréal Basilica, not Basilica of Our Lady of Montreal; and Saint-Joseph du Mont-Royal, not Saint Joseph's Oratory. They also use French for other proper names: Place d'Armes, Chapelle du Sacré-Coeur, etc.
    • They are under the terms by which they are commonly known in English, "Marie-Reine-du-Monde Cathedral" and "Notre-Dame de Montréal Basilica", not the French terms "Cathédrale Marie-Reine-du-Monde" and "Basilique Notre-Dame de Montréal". I am not proposing to change "Chemin de le Côte-des-Neiges" to "Coast of the Snows Road", but to the term by which it is commonly known in English, "Côte-des-Neiges Road".
  2. The French names are official names, printed on the street signs, on maps, in guidebooks, and so forth.
    • The French terms are used on street signs because Montreal is officially a French city, and on maps because there is no point in publishing seperate English and French maps. In English guidebooks the English terms are used.
      • Frommer's and Fodors, for example, use the French. Others omit them entirely, as described below.
  3. The French names are more common; most people, whatever their native language, call the streets Rue Peel, Boulevard St.-Laurent, Chemin Côte-des-Neiges, and so on (when they use the titles at all—from my experience they tend to leave them out entirely, saying simply Peel, St.-Laurent, and Côte-des-Neiges).
    • I've lived in Montreal for more than 20 years, and I cannot recall once hearing a term like "Rue Peel" in the middle of an English sentence. If you don't believe me, pick up a Newspaper or listen to a traffic report.
      • I've only lived here for a few years, but I have heard such uses—though as I said, I've heard people omit the Rue or Street more often than not.
      • As for newspapers: The Gazette uses the English names. The Mirror simply omits them.
  4. Taken to its conclusion this Anglicization would require translating all the French street names into English: thus you would end up with Saint Lawrence Boulevard, Pine Avenue, and other perplexing terms.
    • Again, I not am proposing the "Anglicization" of Montreal street names. I am proposing we use the terms by which they are commonly known in English, such as "Saint-Laurent Boulevard" or "Côte-des-Neiges Road".
      • Except it seems equally common to call them simply Saint-Laurent or Côte-des-Neiges. Would that be agreeable?
—No-One Jones 04:53, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

I have not objections to omiting them, although I don't understand why this is preferable to using English terms. -

It's a compromise between the official names and the common English usage, which is divided between using French (rarely), using English words (sometimes) and omitting both (sometimes). I'll go ahead and make the changes. do nothing, since you've already done it. Thanks. —No-One Jones 06:20, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

International English

I think that for the sake of all the English speakers who do not live in Quebec, know absolutely no French (or so little), we can write Peel street, St-Denis street and mention somewhere that since (insert date here), a regulation makes all city signs French. (Before that, it depended on the neighbourhood.) Mathieugp 15:42, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

I am opposed to using anything but the French terms for Montreal streets. It is not up to us to decide which of several possible unofficial anglicizations is preferable for French street names. Would it be De L'Assomption Boulevard, L'Assomption Boulevard, Assomption Boulevard, De L'Assomption, L'Assomption, Assomption, or Assumption Boulevard? Correct answer: Boulevard de l'Assomption.
Furthermore, nobody would dare write Rivoli Street or Champs-Élysées Avenue for Paris streets... I hope. Or for that matter, rue Fleet in fr:Londres. Why should the official, French street names in this officially French-speaking city be treated differently?
Finally, I shouldn't have to point out that what people say has little or no bearing on what we ought to write. I think official usage has just a little bit more to do with it. And my mail arrives addressed to Rue Saint-X. - Montréalais 01:54, 11 May 2004 (UTC)
Just to throw in my two cents worth, we should write what people will expect to read. Which, in the Montreal press, is "Peel" for English, or "rue Peel" for French; official documents generally use "rue Peel" or, occasionally, "Peel Street", causing Montrealers to pause and check that it really means the same place. Now, people who've never been to Montreal and speak no French might as well be prepared for what they're going to see and hear when they visit. (If they're never going to visit, it doesn't really matter what we call everything...) And the choice of partial Anglicization is a major stumbling block. (I should point out, just to muddy the waters, that Arabic names are transliterated and the English name is often used in Wikipedia; but the criterion seems to be "what do English speakers familiar with it call it?" By this test, "Peel" it is, along with "de la Montagne" and so forth).
Using the full French name can be cumbersome and probably not useful; one rarely sees "rue Peel" (any more than "Peel street") in English print.
So I guess my vote is for "Peel", or "Peel (street)" if disambiguation is necessary ("Peel (street in Montreal)"? Isn't it named after a British one?). --Andrew 03:58, May 11, 2004 (UTC)
The notion that the form "Peel" is regularly used in print to refer to Montreal streets is simply false. Sure, we say it in informal speech, and in a few contexts where using the full name would be heavy, for example if several other generics have already been used in the same clause. But it would not ever be presented as the full name of the street. "Peel is a street in Montreal running between...."? Preposterous. - Montréalais 05:07, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Incidentally, here are the official rules for Quebec toponyms:

On doit respecter la langue dans laquelle les noms ont été officialisés. On ne doit donc pas traduire les noms de lieux du Québec, ni même seulement leur élément générique (lac, rivière, mont, etc.). Exemple : Dans un guide touristique en anglais, on parlera des Îles de la Madeleine, non pas des Magdalen Islands.
("The language in which names are officialized [French] must be respected. Place names in Quebec must therefore not be translated, not even their generic element (lac, rivière, mont, etc.) Example: In a tourist guide in English, the name Îles de la Madeleine should be used, not 'Magdalen Islands.'") - Commission de Toponymie

I could see violating this rule in cases where usefulness of the encyclopedia could be hampered (for example Quebec City -- which nevertheless mentions the official name in the first section), but this is not the case with street names. Quite the reverse: a person who comes to Montreal looking for Pine Avenue (or "The Main," for that matter) is going to have quite the hunt on her hands, even though many people still call it that.

As for the "comprehension" argument, that's not treated as a good reason to alter street names in any other city. Madrid mentions "Plaza de Colón," "Gran Vía," "Plaza del Dos de Mayo," with not the slightest concern spared for the poor, suffering monolingual reader to whom the word "rue" apparently presents an insurmountable barrier.

The fact remains that there is one and only one name for a street in Montreal, and that is the French one: generic + articulation + specific. It is not our job to rule on which of several conceivable English variants ought to be used for French-named streets, which is, all euphemism aside, what is proposed. The least we can do in writing an encyclopedia is to get the name right.

A complete database of Quebec toponyms with correct orthography is available from the Commission at [1].

- Montréalais 05:21, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

OK. I agree now that we ought to stick to the official names including the rue, avenue, boulevard, place, croissant, lac, etc. part of the name so that visitors are informed of the real names. If it is going to be that way however, then we should definitely give some sort of an explanation for it somewhere in the article. Mathieugp 15:16, 11 May 2004 (UTC)


For the time being I've removed what I gather is meant to be the locator map of Quebec, since it's very large and of no help in finding Montreal. I also question whether we need the complete list of MPs and MNAs in the box. Maybe just a number of seats, as in the province articles. - Montréalais 03:36, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Keep the MPs, just look at the Toronto, Ottawa, Calgary, Peel, and Greater Vancouver Regional District articles. I'm trying to get a project started. I'm gonna upload a new map that will be a little more help. Earl Andrew 05:37, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I agree that a list of MPs and MNAs would be useful; I just question whether they should be in the box. I imagine boxes as being primarily for "facts at a glance," which a big list is not; it's also makes the box very cumbersome from a layout point of view. I'd prefer for the lists to be within the body of the article, and in a different format (including the name of the riding, for example).

Also, the map is cool, but if I could make a suggestion: have a box within the map showing a blowup of the Montreal area, with the island in red. That could be useful in distinguishing Montreal from its immediate environs. It would also be especially helpful for articles concerning suburban regions, to show them in geographical relation to the metropolis. - Montréalais 16:27, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The idea to have the MP's and MNA's was copied from some british articles (eg. City of London) Montreal just happens to have a lot of people, therefore a lot of representitives. If you are going to take them off, a link would be helpful at where the MP's used to be in the box. And I was thinking the same thing about the map, I didn't want to go through the trouble. I might as well now though. Earl Andrew 17:30, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I like that idea foe the map. For the MP's, just put them in a section of the article. 21:48, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Don't you think it would be safe to use whatever names were in English before the Francization program? I mean, no offence to Quebec Nationalism, but streets and places in Montreal are very different from streets and places in Paris. For many, many years, Montreal had equal French and English populations. Still today, Anglophones are a large majority. I hope not to touch on any nerves here, but before "Avenue Saint-Laurent" was but a twinkle in Rene Levesque's eye, it was "Saint Lawrence Street". And, come on- "RUE" University? The specific isn't even French! Now, let's be honest- no Anglophone anything in Montreal writes French generics (rue .., ave. ..., etc...). No anglophone says "Rue Peel" or "boulevard Saint-Laurent". In fact, most still say saint-Lawrence street, or even, heaven forbis- The Main 30 June 2005 03:28 (UTC)

"Still today, Anglophones are a large majority."
Sorry, but this is just plain false, as reading the article itself shows. UnHoly 30 June 2005 15:43 (UTC)

Montréal, Québec

(moved discussion from the Wikipedia:Village pump.)

Could an admin please move "Montreal, Quebec" to "Montréal, Québec"? It cannot be done right now, not sure why (the target page is just a redirect). The e acute is ISO-8859-1 safe.

Urhixidur 12:16, 2004 Aug 23 (UTC)

Is the English name really with an accent? I cannot recall ever seeing it written such outside of French texts. Anárion 13:04, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Google gets 12 million hits for Montreal and 4 million for Montréal, or if limited to english pages only, 7.4 and 1.2 million respectively -- Chris 73 Talk 13:44, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)
Officially, the name Montréal is supposed to be written with an accent in English.
From The Canadian Style, published by Public Works and Government Services Canada, 1997:
"On November 23, 1983, the Treasury Board issued its Circular No. 1983-58 to implement the policy adopted by the Canadian Permanent Committee on Geographical Names (CPCGN) regarding the linguistic treatment of geographical names on federal maps and in federal documents. [...] Names of inhabited places retain their official form in both English and French texts, e.g. Montréal (Que.), Saint John (N.B.), and St. John's (N.L.)."
On the other hand, Montreal (sans accent) is very very common, and easier to type on keyboards sans accents. Grstain 13:47, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
There has been considerable discussion about naming conventions for cities. I believe the convention is to use the most common English language spelling rather than defer to "official" spellings. It was decided that the article should be at Kiev rather than the official "Kyiv", similarly Calcutta is used rather than the official "Kolkata". If we locate Montreal at Montréal, Québec simply because it is the official spelling, we could risk reopening some highly contentious cans of worms (which have been fairly quiet of late). olderwiser 14:16, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Style sheets created and used by government bodies are just that. They have no standing outside the body that creates them and anyone who choses to use them. Different government bodies within the same government may have different style sheets. Often, as with any style sheet or style guide, a particular recommendation may not be generally followed outside the organizaton. See Hansard: Thursday, May 13, 2004 for an official English transcript from the Canadian parliamentary record in which diacritics are not used on Montreal or Quebec (though diacritics appear on personal names and the place name Trois-Rivières). This is normal Canadian English usage in which it is customary for certain place names to appear in English without diacritics (even though in general diacritics on French names are preserved). I would not be surprised to see this change eventually. In which case Wikipedia can also change

eventually. Jallan 18:30, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This article should be at Montréal instead of Montréal, Quebec, as this is a prime example of primary topic disambiguation. Trilobite (Talk) 17:26, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've only ever heard Montréal pronounced in such a way as to warrant keeping the accent in English. Then again, maybe it's pronounced differently in the US (like coupe and coupé). How is it pronounced in Canada - is the spelling Montréal more accurate? zoney  talk 19:28, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
In Canada both Montreal and Quebec are generally pronounced in English as they look like they would be pronounced in English: something like Mun-tree-all and Kwuh-beck. That an Anglicized pronunciation is normal for these forms in English is certainly part of the reason for the customary dropping of the acute accent. In any case, since that is current de facto standard practice and also a practice of the Canadian government (as indicated above in my last note here) it is what Wikipedia should follow. I believe that use of Montréal in an English context is increasing but that it is very far from being the norm. That parliamentary transcripts do not use it shows that CPCGN recommendations are not accepted universally for English text by government bodies. Jallan 20:40, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Our policy is quite simple - you are to use the most common english name. As has been said above, I think that means the unaccented form (Montreal and Quebec). →Raul654 22:52, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)
Oh good. So the policy for this encyclopaedia is to use the wrong names. I think it is splitting hairs to insist on the accent removal - the accented form is correct, but almost identical to the "common" form. zoney  talk 23:33, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
It is not the policy of this encyclopedia to use the wrong names. It is also not the policy of this encyclopedia to replace the forms of names in general use in English by forms not generally used because some people think they ought to be used. Such advocacy is against Wikipedia policy. If, for example, you wanted Deutschland to appear in Wikipedia instead of Germany, you would first have to persuade a substantial number in the outside world to use Deutschland in English text instead of Germany.
To make a case that Montréal is the correct form in English text, you might first convince the editors of the Canadian parliamentary proceedings that they should use it. Then convince the Bank of Montreal (which calls itself "Bank of Montreal" in English and "Banque de Montréal" in French) that they should use Montréal in English. Convince the Montreal Gazette that they are spelling it wrong and so forth. Convince other English newspapers that spell Montreal but Trois Rivières. Only if the outside English-speaking world changes should Wikipedia.
There's a discussion of such translation issues at "Reader Reaction and Workplace Habits in the English Translation of French Proper Names in Canada" by Brian Mossop, Government of Canada Translation Bureau and York University School of Translation. It states in part:

No government-wide official rules have ever been enunciated by a federal authority concerning the translation of French place names into English in running text. However, some government institutions do from time to time provide translators with rules, and these do not necessarily conform with The Canadian Style. For example, the instructions from the Immigration and Refugee Board state that 'Montreal', 'Quebec' (the province) and 'Quebec City' are to be written without accents. Also, an Alta Vista search of Government of Canada Web sites ( showed that 'Québec City' is used, but not nearly as often as the unaccented form: there were 1,124 hits for the accented form, as compared to 5,254 hits for 'Quebec City'.

While your at it, persuade French speakers in Canada that "London, Ontario" in Canada should not be rendered in French as "Londres, Ontario" because "Londres" is the wrong name.
Names of places are often different between languages and only usage defines what is right. Style sheets like The Canadian Style cannot force their views on correctness. No style guide can. The French Language Academy is often the butt of ridicule for attempting and failing to force particular usages and spellings. As long as a significant majority government documents and university publications and newspapers presenting text in English predominantly use Montreal rather than Montréal in English, Montreal is the predominant correct form in English, the form of common usage, and therefore the correct form to be used in Wikipedia. The Canadian Style hasn't yet been able to change general usage on that matter. If usage does change, even if the change were mostly confined to government use and academic use and reference works, then there would be a good case for Wikipedia to follow along.
Are the correct Gaelic forms of Irish names with diacritics always commonly used in Ireland in English text or are the names used in English text often those forms that have become normal in English?
Jallan 02:36, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree with the "most common" rule for spelling — this is language, not mathematics, and there are only "standard" and "nonstandard", not "correct" and "incorrect" — but I wouldn't use Google blindly. We should use the spelling (and accenting) that is most common among professional sources. This is especially important for accenting, because many nonprofessional English-speaking writers don't know how to type letters with accents. That being said, the New York Times, CNN, and other English newspapers I can find, even the Canadian and the Globe and Mail, use the unaccented "Montreal" in their online editions (I'm not sure about print editions). —Steven G. Johnson 01:08, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)

Do we have to have this discussion every three weeks? Why do new editors think that, somehow, the arguments that have failed in the past will somehow prevail this time? THIS IS THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA!!!! RickK 05:00, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)

Er, if they are new editors, they wouldn't been around for previous debates. THIS IS COMMON SENSE!!!! Pcb21| Pete 07:20, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Webster's Ninth New Collegiate lists both spellings in both cases, each with a different pronunciation (the French pronunciations are given for the accented forms). This is consistent with the "conventional/local" distinction, which seems to be standard in English writing. Keep it where it is. Austin Hair 07:51, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)

Would it make sense to ask the developers to design and provide a facility, much as we have now for dates, which would allow entities that have alternative presentations, such as Montreal/Montréal, Hawaii/Hawai'i, etc. to be displayed according to a user's personal preference? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 16:22, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Leave the accents off. I've never once seen them used in Australian English, and suspect that the only place you will find them consistently used in English is in Canada, where Francophone politics is an ever-present force. Our consistent policy has been that where something is well known internationally by a different name to that used locally, the international name takes precedence, and the local name is used as a redirect. This as I see it is saying that so far as article names are concerned, it's more important for the encyclopedia to be easy to use than to be pleasing to the pedants. Andrewa 17:36, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You suspect wrong, Andrewa. Mostly Montreal remains mostly unaccented in English text in Canada. And The Canadian Style rules adopted by a some government departments which would like Montreal to have an acute accent in English text are just as clear that English names should not be modified in French texts, for example that "St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador" should be rendered in French as "St. John's, Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador" instead of the normal French usage "Saint-Jean, Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador". Their rules want cities, towns and villages to remain untranslated and unadapted in style although names of regions and geographics names are to be translated. From this comes the oddity above that they don't want the city "St. John's" to be translated when rendered in French but accept that "Newfoundland" should be translated. I sympathize with an attempt to simplify by standardizing on one name only for each municipality. But the CPCGN rules have not caught on in Canada outside of some government departments and have not become general usage in Canada outside those departments in either English or French. CPCGN wants names of cities to be left alone (other than translating of geographical terms that might be part of a city name). That changes much traditional usage. But names of provinces are to be translated (as the translations are too "official" to be discarded). That produces the much ridiculed recommendation that the city of Québec in the province of Québec should be "Québec, Québec" in French but "Québec, Quebec" in English. The traditional English rendering is "Quebec City, Quebec" and that remains the normal English rendering. See List of communities in Quebec for the normal English forms which are in almost all cases exactly the same as the French forms.. The only ones with different English and French forms are Montreal (which is Montréal in French), Quebec City (which is Québec in French), and Trois Rivières which is often rendered in English by the English translation "Three Rivers". Jallan 19:22, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Very interesting, but I think you've misunderstood me. What I was saying was that outside of Canada, I don't think the accented form is common in English. If as you say the accented form is not the most common English form inside Canada either, that's even more reason not to use it in English Wikipedia article names.
And from what you say it seems this pattern carries on to translated names as well as transliterated ones, with some amusing glitches. Andrewa 03:03, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia: Requested moves

(Discussion on article name moved from WP:RM - see also #Montréal, Québec above.)

  • There's no Montreal, and Montreal, Quebec is most definitely the most prominent Montreal. 06:51, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Well, there is a Montreal, but it's just a redirect. I concur. Noel 14:20, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Strongly support. I wouldn't like to see New York, New York. --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ]] 01:12, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • I'm not too sure. I think Montreal is quite a big city in France. How do the French do it? Dunc| 09:58, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
      • If you look at the disambig page, you'll note no other large cities. From the Montreal article, it says Montreal Quebec is the second largest french (language) city in the world, after Paris, so any city in France would still not be all that notable in comparison. 22:16, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
      • Follow the french way of doing it at because they'll know best about the relative importance of the places. They have the main city at Montreal (Mon-ray-al, and with the accent), and all the other places in France don't have articles yet for some reason. Dunc| 10:46, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
        • Sounds basically reasonable, but I wonder about that accent, which most non-Frence speakers probably don't even know how to type? Clearly there ought to be something at Montreal, but whether it's a redirect to the page (with accent), or the actual page itself, I don't yet have a strong feeling. Noel 14:43, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
          • Wikipedia:Use English; officially the name has an accent, but most English speakers leave it off, so so will we. The French get a bit touchy about what they perceive as American cultural imperialism, and there was something in WP:VP about this before. Dunc| 15:48, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Is Toronto, Ontario going to be moved to Toronto? How about Los Angeles, California? I thought it was now WP style to have Canadian and American city article titles include the state, province, or territory. - Montréalais 20:26, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
      • It would have been nice to know that (I didn't) before the move was made. That's the kind of data the move notice planted over here was supposed to attract. I would not have supported the move (see above) had I known about this. Noel 15:20, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • This is ridiculous. Move it back to Montreal, Quebec. There needs to be a standard. Only one city in Canada should not need the province following at that's Ottawa because it's the capital. There is a standard that must be followed. Earl Andrew 20:52, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
      • Actually, I would argue that if Montreal is Montreal, Quebec, Ottawa should certainly be Ottawa, Ontario, since unlike Washington it's definitely in a particular province. - Montréalais 21:12, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
        • Ottawa is the capital though of Canada. It is important to Canada more than Ontario. However I will concede there is a case to move it to Ottawa, Ontario but I would not agree with it. We are trying to follow some sort of a naming convention, which has been until name, City, Province except for Ottawa. Washington is at Washington, DC because Washington is also a US state. :-) Earl Andrew 22:02, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • There seems to be some consensus to move it back to Montreal, Quebec. Any objections, or shall I do so? - Montréalais 16:02, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Not yet. There are two issues here:
    1. Montreal and Quebec versus Montréal and Québec (where I think the answer from WP:VP above and general practice is put the articles in the English Montreal and Quebec rather than the French Montréal and Québec, with redirects from the French versions to the English versions); and
    2. Montreal versus Montreal, Quebec (ultimately, I don't care very much, as there will be a redirect from one to the other in any event: however, the most common English name for Montreal, Quebec is Montreal and that would usually prevail, I think; ditto for Toronto, Los Angeles etc., with, of course, a {{otheruses}} header and disambiguation page for the other places and things with the same name. I will of course defer if official policy says otherwise. Very much earlier, I note that Montréalais said "It has always been at Montreal, and considering that there's a redirect, I think we can leave it here by virtue of its prominence." Plus ça change...).
There is no readily apparent consensus on naming at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (city names) / Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (city names). -- ALoan (Talk) 16:17, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I'd say move it to Montreal, Quebec or Montréal, Québec just not Montreal as it goes against the normal convention. Earl Andrew 02:13, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Why do we have the page under the wrong spelling of the word? Why doesn't the Montreal redirect to Montréal instead of the other way round? --Grcampbell 00:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
Because there's a large set of "language warriors" on Wikipedia who are offended by French names, French spellings, etc. Recently, they've been waging war on a huge number of articles, moving them from the French names by which most people know the topics to the awkward English names they prefer. See any number of talk pages (including this one) for the evidence.
Atlant 12:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
If "Montréal" (accented) were used in the article name, eventually (after new links were added, and disambig done) "Montréal" would become the displayed text in even more of the articles linking here. Often people reading other other articles, search for the word "Montreal" in the article, but can't find it if it's displayed as "Montréal". This problem already exists in some articles, but would be made worse if "Montréal" were adopted as the standard. You have to realize that almost no English-only users, ever type-in accents. Re-directs don't fix the problem. Example: search for "Montreal" inside List of radio stations in Quebec. Because the link (and display text) was done with an accent, the "Find on page" doesn't work with "Montreal" (at least with IE). Other articles are much bigger, and the "Find on page" feature is valuable, if it works. --rob 10:10, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Do we really want the "American English" pronunciation? As far as I'm aware, /mAn.tri"AL/ isn't a variant pronunciation, it's just incorrect.

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Montreal/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

==WikiProject Cities== Rated B French/English duplication needs to stop. Too many photographs clutter the text. Figures in tables need to be from the same data set, a 2006 metro population and a 2001 urban figure in the same table make it difficult to understand the ratios. The lead needs to be brought up to WP:LEAD. 20:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 20:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 21:44, 3 May 2016 (UTC)