Logo Voyage

Talk:Montérégie Voyage Tips and guide

You can check the original Wikivoyage article Here

New articles created for regional county municipalities

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 months ago51 comments7 people in discussion

    Within the last 24 hours, there have been several new articles created for regional county municipalities. While I don't have an issue with using municipal boundaries at all (in fact, I support the use of municipal or official boundaries to use mapshapes from OSM), Veillg1, I'd like to discuss these articles. First up, these names are way too long, encyclopedic and let's be for real, names that nobody uses outside of government or the encyclopedia. But the names isn't the only issue I have, I question whether a region with fifty articles (including these new RCM pages created) needs thirteen regions (which equates to 3.5 articles per RCM). For me, I find nine, maybe ten regions as the uppermost number of regions that I can comfortably navigate through. Anything more, and that's when I find it uncomfortable to navigate through and I close the page.

    Another issue with these new articles is that they've been created, but the categorization of the cities/towns are still under Montérégie, not the new RCM articles. This would need to be fixed, but first we need to get the regions sorted out first.

    So to summarize, going forward, three important steps should be done to clean these RCM articles up:

    1. Find a shorter name for these overly encyclopedic article names
    2. Establish the region boundaries – right now, the colours on the map don't mean anything. 13 is way too many regions.
    3. Fix the categorization of all articles breadcrumbed under Category:Montérégie

    For the first step, all I would suggest is to drop the "Regional County Municipality" and "Agglomeration" – these are terms that your average English speaker probably would have never heard of. Anecdotally speaking, I first only heard "agglomeration", when learning français. @Ground Zero:, do you have any suggestions on what these should be renamed to?

    The second one is the hardest one in my opinion, but also the least important one right now, as there's no harm in leaving the fifty articles as it currently is. We can leave it with 13 region boundaries, but as I mentioned, it's too many to comfortably navigate through.

    The third one can only be done if the second is done, and I'm happy to fix that once we've finished the first two steps.

    Other comments? In particular, I would like to get rid of the overly encyclopedic names, and Veillg1, I would like your input on what these should be called.

    --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 14:42, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

    I agree with SHB2000's comments This appears to be a matter of creating articles for the sake of creating articles, rather than for the benefit of the traveller. Veillg1 has created a lot of excellent travel content for English Wikivoyage, and I thank them for their contributions. Often, though, they add stuff that makes Wikivoyage encyclopedic and, well, dull. We aim to create a travel guide that is useful and enjoyable to read. Using technical, bureaucratic names in article titles is not appropriate for a travel guide. Travellers do not say to each other, "hey, let's go to Les Jardins-de-Napierville Regional County Municipality for the weekend!"
    I think in each case, the "Regional County Municipality" addendum to the name can be chopped off. If the shortened name is already is use, then "county" or "region" can be added to the name to distinguish the article.
    But more importantly, we should ask whether these new articles are providing information that is different from existing articles. If not, let's save readers and extra step by eliminating one level of subregion.
    The municipal organization of Quebec or any other jurisdiction is rarely, if ever, of interest to travellers. Ground Zero (talk) 14:55, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

    Veillg1, none of these articles have any travel content. They are only lists of places, many of which are red links. Are you planning to add travel content to all of these articles? If so, please give us an idea of how long you think it will take you to do this. If you are not planning to add travel content to the RCM articles, then they should be deleted. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 01:45, 10 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

    I'm also confused on why {{mapgroup-item}} is used instead of {{marker}}. Mapgroup-item should only be used in "Go next". SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 02:05, 10 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    @Veillg1:? I've noticed you've made a few edits to these region articles. Re-pinging if the ping did not work. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Anyway, if there are no objections by tomorrow, I will rename all the articles to drop the "Regional County Municipality". SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Unless Veillg1 is planning to add travel content to these articles, I think they should be deleted instead of being renamed. They don't help the traveller. They seem to exist for some notion of "completeness". Ground Zero (talk) 14:43, 14 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    I'll be listing these articles on vfd if I don't hear a response soon. Pinging again @Veillg1: (I've been on the road since yesterday morning, so unfortunately can't list them now, but I'll be able to do this in an hour once I arrive in Brisbane) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    @SHB2000 - Concerning the design of articles (or the enrichment of the content of published articles) on the regional county municipalities (RCM) of the Montérégie, my intention is to design regional type content: regional tourist circuits, regional flavors circuit, circuit of local products, regional particularities (ex.: wooded maple groves extending over several municipalities), regional festivities (ex.: boat festivals on the Richelieu River, regional celebrations evoking the Patriots, regional apple festivals. ..), regional traveling markets, regional tourism projects... There is no question of repeating the editorial content specific to a municipality. For my part, my design process is planned to be done gradually over the next few weeks. The "Montérégie" article (English project) also requires an update.
    The title of each article of the RCM is harmonized with the same titles of Wikipedia (English project); I would very much like there to be a single standard in titles for the various editorial projects in English. Otherwise, it generates unnecessary confusion. Veillg1 (talk) 02:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it's completely reasonable that it sometimes uses encyclopedic article titles a travel guide wouldn't use. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:45, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Now that I've got some somewhat stable connection, here's a full response.
    It would be nice if we can work out regions for Montérégie. Category:Montérégie contains 40 destinations (excluding the over-encyclopedic regional county municipality articles), and that is quite a lot to comfortably maneuver through. At the same time, 13 region articles is also quite a lot to divide these regions up. What division would make more sense for travellers? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 03:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    By the way, speaking of divergences between Wikipedia and Wikivoyage titles: Veillg1, could you please stop creating articles with names like "Saint-Jean-Baptiste, Quebec"? First of all, "Quebec" is in this instance a completely unnecessary disambiguation, and secondly, even if there were a Wikivoyage article about another place named Saint-Jean-Baptiste, the way we disambiguate on Wikivoyage is to put the disambiguating term in parentheses, never after a comma. We've discussed this before. Please get used to this difference between English-language Wikivoyage and English-language Wikipedia, and thanks in advance for (I hope) no longer using or incorrectly formatting disambiguating terms in article titles. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:15, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    And this isn't just something we do on the English Wikivoyage, this is also done on the French Wikivoyage. By doing such, you're creating work for others in having to fix red links. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:38, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

    Renaming

    [edit]

    If the articles are going to be expanded, then we should hold off on discussion of deletion. There is a lot of work to be down in expanding these articles and in creating articles for the many, many redlinked destinations in them, so let's not create any more RCM articles until that is done.

    There is no reason to harmonize the article titles with Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so using official or legal names has merit. Wikivoyage is a travel guide that aims to have a lively tone.

    I repeat, for comment, the proposal that I made above:

    "the "Regional County Municipality" addendum to the name can be chopped off. If the shortened name is already is use, then "county" or "region" can be added to the name to distinguish the article."

    Ground Zero (talk) 15:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

    Chopping "Regional County Municipality" of the name sounds a good plan. Where this gives a name which is already in use, or a city which might get an article then adding a single word is fine. I have just had a look at the websites of several of the listings in cities within these Regional County Municipalities and none of the businesses mentionned the Regional County Municipality in saying where they are - many just had the city, Quebec. AlasdairW (talk) 22:15, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Yes Done. Chopped off the "regional county municipality" off, but for Acton and Roussillon, I had to add a (region) disambiguator as there were other articles named as such. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

    July 2022

    [edit]

    It has been just over a month since I started this thread. Unfortunately, not much has changed since June 9; all articles still have little to no helpful content.

    Whilst some like La Vallée-du-Richelieu and Marguerite-D'Youville have an article for every single destination listed, some like Acton (region), Rouville and Les Jardins-de-Napierville are only redlink farms. I still haven't fixed the categorization and breadcrumbs yet because we have yet to settle on boundaries (and if I'm feeling like it, I might make a static map – no promises). However, I don't support incomplete regionalization for such prolonged periods. @Ground Zero, Ikan Kekek: any idea what to do? @Veillg1: how much longer do you need to "improve" these articles? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 13:37, 14 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

    Looking at it, Category:Montérégie does have 52 pages with around 13 regional county municipalities making it 39 actual destination articles. Should some of these be merged? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 02:58, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Anyone? It's almost two months since we've let this issue hang around. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:39, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

    Here are the sub-regions listed, with the number if articles that we have for each if them:

    • Longueuil — city article
    • Acton — 0 articles
    • Beauharnois-Salaberry — 1 article
    • La Vallée-du-Richelieu — 13 articles
    • Le Haut-Richelieu — 1 article
    • Le Haut-Saint-Laurent — 2 articles
    • Les Jardins-de-Napierville — 0 articles
    • Les Maskoutains — 1 article
    • Marguerite-D'Youville — 6 articles
    • Pierre-De Saurel — 5 articles
    • Roussillon — 3 articles
    • Rouville — 0 articles
    • Vaudreuil-Soulanges — 3 articles

    Clearly, the regionalization was undertaken way before it was needed. If @Veillg1: is going to be creating articles for the red links in these subregions, then we shouldn't start merging them. But unless Veillg1 tells us what their plan is, it looks like these subregionscare just a waste of the reader's time and should be merged.

    Also, the static map labels Marguerite-D'Youville under its old name, Lajammerais. Ground Zero (talk) 11:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

    The articles on the municipalities/cities of the Montérégie region (in Quebec) are in project (or under construction for those which are already posted). This is a region that is familiar to me since I live there. In the meantime, my energies are invested in finishing designing articles on the magnificent territory of the North Shore of St. Lawrence River. Veillg1 (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Okay, so how long do you need then? One more month? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:30, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

    September 2022

    [edit]

    @Ground Zero, Ikan Kekek, Veillg1: Today (September 8) marks exactly three months since the first region article (Acton (region)) was created. Sadly, the regionalization issues still remain – should we merge all these regions back? Veillg1, how much longer do you need and please give me a compelling argument on why you think you'll be able to finish this within that timeframe. If I don't hear a response by October 1, I'm going to assume you've abandoned these articles and will merge all of them to Montérégie. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

    Here are the articles that we have for each of the sub-regions now:

    • Longueuil — city article
    • Acton — 0 articles
    • Beauharnois-Salaberry — 1 article
    • La Vallée-du-Richelieu — 13 articles
    • Le Haut-Richelieu — 1 article
    • Le Haut-Saint-Laurent — 2 articles
    • Les Jardins-de-Napierville — 0 articles
    • Les Maskoutains — 1 article
    • Marguerite-D'Youville — 6 articles
    • Pierre-De Saurel — 5 articles
    • Roussillon — 3 articles
    • Rouville — 0 articles
    • Vaudreuil-Soulanges — 3 articles

    These are the same numbers as at July 29. I was hoping to see some progress so that this work wouldn't have to be undone, but it does not look promising. Ground Zero (talk) 10:33, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

    @Veillg1:? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:42, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
    It has been four months now and 10 days past October 1. @Veillg1: please respond. Otherwise, I will merge these articles. We're only going to go in circles unless you respond. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 05:54, 10 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Your follow-up is an opportunity to talk about the design in relation to the administrative region of Montérégie (in Quebec) which I know relatively well for traveling there regularly. The creation of articles on this region is progressing on WV (French); as well as adding photos for Wikimedia Commons. In addition, a few hundred new photos of this region are coming, including localities that have not yet published an article. I consider that these articles on the Montérégie are under construction. As for WV (English), my enthusiasm as a designer has diminished following some deletions of content, some comments, as well as an abusive blocking. My participation in WV (English) has not ceased; but, for now, the collaboration of the various communities has redirected my priorities as a designer.
    Notes (concerning Montérégie on WV-English):
    • Les Jardins de Napierville (1 published article - Hemmingford (grouping village and township));
    • Pierre De-Sorel: (6 published articles).
    • Vaudreuil-Soulanges (4 published articles); three other articles were published in French.
    Veillg1 (talk) 03:20, 11 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

    ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Les Jardins de Napierville remains nothing but a list of redlinks, so I have redirected it to Hemmingford, the only article we have for the region. Thus way, if readers search on Les Jardins de Napierville, they will be directed to an article with travel information. Ground Zero (talk) 13:04, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

    Subtitle RCM

    [edit]

    The article lists the RCMs (regional county municipalities) and an equivalent territory, namely the Agglomeration of Longueuil (and not the city of Longueuil). This list does not include administrative regions according to the administrative structure in force in Quebec. Thus, the subtitle "Regions" is inappropriate because it confuses with "administrative regions" (eg: Montérégie, Mauricie...). My recommendation is to use the term RCM (Regional County Municipality) as the title of this section. - Veillg1 (talk) 17:00, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

    state your case in Wikivoyage_talk:Article_skeleton_templates/Sections and follow the appropriate procedures, s'il vous plaît. Ibaman (talk) 15:04, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
    The article reflects the regions used by Wikivoyage for providing information to travellers. Those looking for information on local government administrative structures should look to Wikipedia for information. Wikivoyage is not an encyclopedia. Ground Zero (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
    As Ibaman and GZ mentioned, WIKIVOYAGE N'EST PAS UNE ENCYCLOPÉDIE. I'm writing this in all caps in big text and in French, because I don't think you'll ever get the point after telling you this hundreds of times if I write this in ordinary text. Give an argument at Wikivoyage talk:Article skeleton templates/Sections if you think this should be an exception, but I doubt you'll get very far, IMO. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 06:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
    We divide the world into Continents, Countries and Regions, and don't use other terms - Quebec is also a Region. It is important to note that our regions are NOT regional county municipalities. A particular site may be in one regional county municipality, but we might find it was more convenient for travel purposes to list it in another region, and so move the region boundary to fit. If the term "regional county municipality", or more likely "municipalité régionale de comté" is likely to be seen by visitors to the area, we could have a sentence explaining it. AlasdairW (talk) 23:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

    January 2023

    [edit]

    Here are the articles that we have for each of the sub-regions now. I have started to clean this up as it seems that this project has been abandoned.

    I will continue to work on and update this, but I am looking for ideas on how to handle the regions with only 2 or 3 articles. Ground Zero (talk) 13:57, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

    Based on this map, I propose to reorganize this region as follows so that we don't have so many empty region articles.

    Map of Montérégie (by county)

    Note: Brome-Mississquoi La Haute-Yamaska and are not in our definition of Montérégie. They are in Eastern Townships. Ground Zero (talk) 15:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

    This is an interesting region. I just browsed the French version and did some counting. If it eventually fills out in the way the current links suggest, it'll have 135 city articles, which would be about 15% of Canada by article count. I definitely agree the existing encyclopedic structure is too complex for a travel guide, and your proposal certainly improves it.
    However, as interesting as this area is, it all fits within an hour's drive of Montreal. It makes it seem a bit odd that there is no W:Greater Montreal or South Shore region. As a visitor, I'd be more likely to think of some of these places as suburbs and side-trip destinations for Montreal. For example, it might be nice to look at a region one level above Montreal in the breadcrumb that can compare whether I should spend a day in Rouville, Laval, or Rigaud, and so on. Southwestern Quebec feels too big, but Montérégie (as a region-of-regions of outline-status towns) feels too broken up. Maybe it's a discussion if/when the articles at the end of the hierarchy fill out. Gregsmi11 (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
    @Gregsmi11: I was hoping that we would get some more comments. May of the articles in this region were created by one contributor who didn't have much regard for the English Wikivoyage style or for other contributors. It seems like they have opted out of further contributions.
    I see the advantage of a South Shore region, but which of these comtés would that include, and what would we do with the rest of them? Ground Zero (talk) 02:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
    @Ground Zero Working from the "bottom" up (that is, all the see and do listings in Montérégie - but without the most typical looking churches, boat ramps, stables, golf courses, municipal parks/community centres, etc.. ) the map kind of shows an "inner ring" with a few clusters along the rivers and inside Autoroute 30. The rest is a bit more spread out and the listings feel more rural. Combining some of these small towns could make the hierarchy less confusing. A rural approach that captures larger areas could provide some interesting and fully fleshed out thematic sections, e.g. boating the Richelieu, historic churches, equestrian centres, farm visits, gallery tours, etc.
    If I were to propose a more drastic reorganization, I could see something like:
    Montérégie (Region)
    Gregsmi11 (talk) 14:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
    @Ground Zero, Gregsmi11: 11 months later, are we good to implement this proposal? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 00:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
    I think I don't understand the proposal. Would this split Montérégie into two sub-regions on the Montérégie region? or would they be two regions within the Southwestern Quebec region? Ground Zero (talk) 12:14, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
    I don't fully either, but if you guys can put together some mapshapes, I'm more than willing to create a static map. I'll have quite some time until mid-Feb so time shouldn't be a problem for me atm (which is why I haven't created one since September :-(). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:24, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
    I've played around with the mapping a bit more here: User:Gregsmi11/sandboxMontérégie. I think either approach (splitting Montérégie, or creating two regions in SW Quebec) could work. However, if we make the change at the SW Quebec level, I think we should consider a "Greater Montreal" region consisting of (1)the "south shore" parts of Montérégie, (2)Montreal, and (3)Laval. These three areas are currently spread across two regions with Montreal sitting in a hole in the middle, but I doubt that really serves the typical traveller. Splitting Montérégie could be an easy interim step, though. Looking closer at the map, I don't think we'd need subregions. It would mostly be an exercise in merging mostly-empty rural articles, and flattening accordingly. Gregsmi11 (talk) 17:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

    ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ The Greater Montreal region sitting under Quebec as an eighth region in the hierarchy makes sense to me. There is already a wikipedia article on it: w:Greater Montreal. I suggest using that definition, for consistency. Ground Zero (talk) 18:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

    July 2024

    [edit]

    Nothing has yet happened on this. While I understand the desire for a bigger reorganization, I think that its scale is so big and daunting that it is preventing anything from happening.

    I return to my original proposal which would been relatively straightforward to implement:

    This does not preclude a future reorganization, but would clean up from the previous partial reorganization. Ground Zero (talk) 11:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

    Map
    Map of Montérégie

    Though I would use Longueuil (region) over Longueuil region as per Wikivoyage:Naming conventions. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 12:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
    Quite right. I've changed it. Ground Zero (talk) 12:16, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
    If there are no objections or amendmentd, I will implement this next week. Ground Zero (talk) 12:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
    Support. It's a logical and feasible reorg. I wish I had more time these days to help out here; thanks @Ground Zero for keeping this on your radar. Gregsmi11 (talk) 01:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

    I've started to implement this. It's a work-in-progress. Ground Zero (talk) 02:12, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

    Thank you! It's looking much better now than it was. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 07:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

    Discover


    Powered by GetYourGuide