Talk:North Shore (Greater Vancouver)

Page move discussion

I object to this change in dab - North Shore (Greater Vancouver) is a geographic term, North Shore (Metro Vancouver) is a political one. There was no need for this change, and the ongoing confusion between the name of the board of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and the actual area of Greater Vancouver is, when applied, "original research". There was no need for this change, and now it just looks odd. Metro Vancouver is the organization, Greater Vancouver is the REGION.Skookum1 (talk) 14:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Reverted, per this note. There may be a better page name, but Metro Vancouver doesn't seem to be it. --Ckatz^chat_spy 18:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, actually the proper dab is probably North Shore (British Columbia), as there are other North Shores in Canada, but no others (that I'm aware of...) in BC (not capitalized ones anyway).Skookum1 (talk) 13:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I was going to say I agree with Skookum's initial objection, but the standard convention is to use the province to disambiguate (where possible), not a geographic sub-region, so I would also agree with his later comment that the proper title is North Shore (British Columbia). This issue has come up before (for example, whether articles should be DAB'ed with "Newfoundland and Labrador", the name of the province, or "Newfoundland", the name of the island on which the article subject is located -- the consensus has been to use the former), and we should try to be consistent. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

As of right now, Metro Vancouver is also a geographical term or region so I think it will be move to North Shore (Metro Vancouver) and it's not inappropriate. But North Shore (Metro Vancouver) has the most links. Steam5 (talk) 02:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Steam5, you're wrong. Metro Vancouver is the name of a governmental body and an administrative districts. Regional districts should not be confused with regions and in this particular case the actual name of the regional district itself (but not its governing body) remains "Greater Vancouver". But the region is in fact "the Lower Mainland" and/or "Greater Vancouver". The regional district was named for the region. Just because its governing body wants to make itself sound bigger/more important by rebranding itself to the neo-torontonian "Metro" the reality is that that doesn't change the name of the region, i.e. the geographic region. Wikipedia should not be a vehicle for rebranding/re-marketing efforts, and the ongoing confusion/perpetration over the use of "Metro Vancouver" is a case in point. "Updating" names through mistaken understanding of terms and types of terms is just plain wrong and unencyclopedic. "North Shore of Vancouver" is a well-established phrase, "Greater Vancouver" remains the name of the geographic sense of the urban region, "Metro Vancouver" is a branding effort by the regional district, which is only one of the various government administrative districts covering the area and which could theoretically also be used for disambiguation (e.g. the Ministry of Environment region for this area is the Lower Mainland Region, which includes the Sunshine Coast, the Ministry of Economic Development uses "Mainland Southwest", a designation which includes Lillooet and Lytton...and this remains the New Westminster Land District, which is the "base level" placename classifier referenced by all ministries and used by the BCGNIS.Skookum1 (talk) 13:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

As no one objected to the point initially raised by Skookum (that the proper DAB is by province), I have moved the article to North Shore (British Columbia). Thanks to Skookum for raising the issue. Steam5's subsequent comment seems to be addressing the initial issue (Metro Vancouver or Greater Vancouver?), and he did not speak to disambiguation by province. In fact, the Metro vs. Greater debate simply emphasizes why we always disambiguate by province where possible, so as to avoid debates such as this one. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe that Metro Vancouver is also a region use to be Greater Vancouver so the move would've change to North Shore (Metro Vancouver) already, instead of Greater Vancouver. Note: North Shore (Metro Vancouver) already has the most links. Steam5 (talk) 18:12, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment Skeezix, I'm moving the page back to "Greater Vancouver". This is not an indication of support for any particular result; you're being reverted, as was Steam5, until consensus is established. I would ask that all contributors allow the page to remain where it is until discussion completes, as page-move wars are undesirable. Thank you. --Ckatz^chat_spy 19:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Seriously? You're creating a problem where there was not one. After a week, we still have the same three original commentators, with two saying that the Greater Vancouver vs. Metro Vancouver issue is a red herring. But fine, let's wait. I would also ask that you refrain from using loaded terms like "page move wars", because I don't believe that anyone involved in this discussion has that intention. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not a "loaded term"; the problem exists because the page is being moved when there is an obvious disagreement as to where it should be moved. (For example, Steam5 have moved it twice now.) The best approach would be to list it at "Requested Moves" and/or put a notice up at the Canadian naming standards page. --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Nobody has moved the page twice except you. I again ask that you stop making accusations - it's not helpful. The issue is listed under requested moves at WP:CANBOARD since May 28 -- that's how I came here in the first place. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:00, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Check the move logs - Steam5 moved it to "Metro" twice, and you moved it to "British Columbia". FYI, no-one is making accusations; only observing that the page shouldn't be moved while discussion is under way (and while two differingsp opinions are under discussion.) Let's please stay focussed on the move. --Ckatz^chat_spy 16:28, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

You did accuse me of moving the page repeatedly, but it's good that you would now like to focus on the substantive discussion. The two differing opinions that you mentioned would appear to be North Shore (Metro Vancouver), which Steam5 appears to still be favouring (but which three others have said is not correct), and North Shore (British Columbia), which two editors have endorsed and with which no one has directly disagreed (except perhaps for Steam in that he still favours "Metro Vancouver", but that name has been rejected). That's where the discussion was a week ago. I'm not sure there is any live dispute here, but we can certainly wait longer for input if you wish. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

The most common usage is "the North Shore of Vancouver" or "Vancouver's North Shore". There is no need for either "Greater" or "Metro", and of those two "Greater" is the more common usage and "Metro" is a re-branding neologism. You don't hear the phrase "Metro Vancouver's North Shore" but you do hear the phrase "the North Shore area of the Greater Vancouver region". The logical, and most-simple name change, is to North Shore (Vancouver) as the distinction between Greater/Metro/nothing is insignificant in global terms. Also within British Columbia "North Shore" may have other uses, such as the north side of Shuswap Lake. Usually with disambiguation it's country-first, province-next, then by region-classifier (for regions) or by river classifier (if for a river), or by parent range (if a mountain range). In this case "North Shore" is a region, not a regional district or a municipality belonging to one; the region is "Greater Vancouver" (the regional district is Metro Vancouver, or rather the governing board of the regional district is "Metro Vancouver") but "most common use", especially outside of British Columbia, is, and I repeat "Vancouver's North Shore" or "the North Shore (area) of Vancouver". North Shore (Vancouver) will do just fine, and is the simplest usage.Skookum1 (talk) 13:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to have been Solomonic in just moving it and tossing out all of the three usages in the offing, but the logic of the simplification is real simple: simple is best. Nobody outside BC gives a good-god-damn whether it's Metro or Greater Vancouver and as noted there may be other "North Shore" uses in British Columbia, although of course this is the primary one. But as I noted in the move I just went and did, aside from the fact disambiguations should be as simple as possible, the most common phrases used to reference the North Shore in a regional context are "Vancouver's North Shore" and "the North Shore (region) of Vancouver". Using "Greater Vancouver" or "Metro Vancouver" in either construction sounds stilted and overdone, and as explained to Steam5 a regional district and a region are not the same thing, and teh former should not be used as if it meant the latter; the North Shore existed a long time before Metro Vancouver did, either as an RD (1966)) or as a re-branding name (very recently); also "North Shore of British Columbia" doesn't exist, unless we count the beaches on Atlin and Teslin Lakes...North Shore also is not a specified "official" subregion of the regional district, which is even more reason not to use that name; also within Greater Vancouver there's the north side fo the Fraser, which sometimes is referred to as "communities on the north shore (or bank or side) or the Fraser". But everybody knows which North Shore you're talking about when you say it by itself; and until the vogue in substituting "Metro Vancouver" in all kinds of silly places, the common phrasing was and remains "the North Shore of Vancouver"; it's not in the City of Vancouver, true, but "Vancouver" from a global perspective includes even Abbotsford and Whistler...Skookum1 (talk) 14:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I agree, Skookum. General usage aside (and I don't doubt any of what you have said about common usage), I am very concerned about disambiguating with a place where the article subject actually isn't located. Regardless of anecdotal evidence about what people may consider Abbotsford and Whistler to be, on Wikipedia the term Vancouver links to an article on the actual city, and I think the disambiguation you have suggested would just be confusing (and is, in fact, incorrect). This is why we normally disambiguate by province so as to avoid messy debates like this one (remember, disambiguation is not necessarily expected to be in accord with common usage - it's purpose is to resolve conflict between article names). Having said that, your logic does lead me to suggest that perhaps we could eliminate the disambiguation altogether, and just call the article North Shore of Vancouver or something to that effect -- there is a principle that the article title should follow common usage (even if that usage might be a little bit geographically inaccurate). --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment The page has been protected from additional moves for one week. Again, please don't move it during a move discussion. It doesn't matter if there are only three people (I'm here as an admin, not a participant) discussing it - for the sake of stability, you have to reach an agreement first. If consensus is reached prior to the protection period, just let me or any other admin know where it should move to. Thank you. --Ckatz^chat_spy 21:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, there is such a thing as "the Vancouver region"...I also note that on the actual North Shore disambiguation page that there's North Shore (Lake Superior), which is suppose has to be the case because the Minnesota coastline is included, but North Shore (Laval) strikes me as an odd dab because it's not just City of Laval....I"m categorically opposed to using "Metro Vancouver" as if it were a name for the region, so perhaps Greater Vancouver has to be lived with, though to me it sounds unnatural and artificial. The other region-name that could be used is North Shore (Lower Mainland) and that may have to do; I just thought "Vancouver" was the simplest usage/solution because the Greater Vancouver region is often referred to simply as the "Vancouver region" (and is a "unit" within some ministries and govt agencies..) and, as already explained, the most common context is "North Shore of Vancouver" or "Vancouver's North Shore.Skookum1 (talk) 22:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

That's all nice, but you're just grasping at straws. This is the reason, as you originally hit upon, why disambiguation is usually done by province. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment - I will have to agree for the other user by changing the title to North Shore (Lower Mainland) way better than North Shore (Metro Vancouver) so North Shore (Lower Mainland), what do you think of the proposed title? Steam5 (talk) 06:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Guys, you're both all over map, practically suggesting new names with every comment you post. Let's stop going around in circles. The applicable Manual of Style is quite clear: the standard convention is to disambiguate by province, unless doing so is insufficient (e.g. there are two "North Shores" in B.C., or the North shore extends into another jurisdiction, etc.). I'm not familiar enough with the geography here - we need a good reason why we would not use provincial disambiguation here, but no one has yet provided it. What is the rationale here? (BTW, Skookum - you are absolutely correct about North Shore (Laval)). --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Units of jursiisdiction are not relevant; this is a geographic term, and geographic units should be the parameter; there aren't two capital-lettered "North Shores" in BC but lots of casual ones, so North Shore (British Columbia) needs honing, although the others aren't likely to get articles. Metro Vancouver is the name of a government NOT a a region. [[North Shore (Lower Mainland)}] might suffice but has some ambiguity because in the casual sense it also refers to Maple Ridge-Mission-Agassiz etc. I'm fine with either North Shore (Greater Vancouver) or, most preferably North Shore (Vancouver) for the normal-usage reasons mentioned above, i.e the phrases "Vancouver's North Shore" and "the North Shore in Vancouver". Metro Vancouver is a no-go IMO not just because it's a bureaucratic neologism for something that's for most of its life been Greater Vancouver, though admittedly it's been made "trendy" by the media's pushing of the term, but also because it's one of only several possible jurisssdictions that could define the region (regional districts are not the only such division). That's my piece, I appreciate your effort to enlist new blood to this discussion; I just wanted to summarize.Skookum1 (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Skookum, remember that DABing is only required to resolve conflicts between article titles -- it doesn't "need honing" where other (lower case) north shores are unlikely to be subjects of separate articles. I agree that Metro Vancouver is not it, but the debate between Metro Vancouver, Greater Vancouver, Lower Mainland and Vancouver simply emphasizes for me the wisdom of the MOS. We'll see what the "new blood" has to say. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Just throwing this out as an idea: instead of arguing about the appropriate name of the region, why not consider disambiguating it by the specific water body that it's the north shore of, i.e. "North Shore (Burrard Inlet)", since there's very little controversy around how that is named? Bearcat (talk) 19:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)