Talk:Golden Horseshoe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

road This page is part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Golden Horseshoe Roads. The scope of the project is to improve the quality of roads articles in the GTA. If you are interested to help, join here or contribute to the discussion.

Contents

[edit] Haldimand and Norfolk

Should we mention that Haldimand and Norfolk would also be considered part or potentially part of the Golden Horseshoe in common usage? Samaritan 04:23, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Origin of "Golden"

The term predates space flight. A more likely attribution for "golden" is the region's wealth and role as the economic engine of Canada. With the consent of other readers I would like to revise this.

The Canadian Oxford Dictionary attributes the "golden" to wealth. What better authority? Go ahead and change it.--BrentS 03:56, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I always thought it was called "golden" because the land was fertile for growing things... and, for example wheat grows golden coloured. could be wrong.SECProto 16:36, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)
Corn is golden, and its history in Ontario dates back to 1615.[1] That said, I prefer the "economic" angle (which encompasses agricultural, industrial, and commercial). -- Robocoder (talk | contribs) 06:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Northumberland

In there latest report the Gov of Ontario added Northumberland to the Greater Golden Horseshoe so I believe it should be added to the map, etc here.Copper12 03:00, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You're absolutely right about Northumberland County being part of the Greater Golden Horseshoe in the recent February publications. Brantford/Brant County and Haldimand County are included too, but not Norfolk. Feel free to add them when you update the map. (I moved this message to maintain chronologic order) --NormanEinstein 21:06, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I've updated the map. IceKarma 14:44, 2005 Apr 10 (UTC)

[edit] map?

Does anyone know why the map was deleted? If someone who made the original is reading this, can you re-upload? If not, can anyone make a new one? --qviri 05:17, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

The map was deleted on 8 October 2005 in accordance with Wikipedia image policy because it had no source information. I have no useful source information for the image either, so I've left User:Bearcat a message asking for such. If he can provide it, I'll be happy to undelete the map. IceKarma 06:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
The map was created originally by Earl Andrew and is apparently GFDL, so I've reuploaded it (good thing I'm a packrat, eh) and annotated it thus. IceKarma 10:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Earl Andrew responded that he derived the original map from a government source and uploaded it as PD-self. Bearcat's derivative work is GFDL. IceKarma 21:02, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Do we really need the (Ontario) in the name?

Seeing as Golden Horseshoe redirects here anyway, and I am not aware of any other geographical region bearing the same name, how about moving this page to just Golden Horseshoe? --Qviri 03:05, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd support a move back to Golden Horseshoe, but we'd need to find an admin to do it. I believe User:BrentS moved the article not because of disambiguation concerns, but because he feels all geographic article titles should include a geographic reference. --NormanEinstein 16:42, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] population rank

If using combined metropolitan areas, the population of the Golden Horseshoe is still below that of the Baltimore-Washington CSA. It might be on par with the San Francisco-San Jose CSA. It could rank anywhere between 6th and 8th. It's probably better to make rankings more fuzzy, e.g. "among the ten largest conurbations in North America". Polaron | Talk 23:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

The Golden Horseshoe *is* a combined metropolitan area (consists of five CMAs). If you're going to put a comparison, you should compare it to other combined metropolitan areas. Polaron | Talk 01:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

  1. NYC
  2. Mexico City
  3. LA
  4. Chicago
  5. Washington-Baltimore (8.03 million in 2004 growing at 1.6%)
  6. San Francisco Bay Area (7.16 million in 2004 growing at 0.2%)
  7. Extended Golden Horseshoe (7.04 million in 2004 growing at 1.7%)

By 2006, the Golden Horseshoe should have overtaken the Bay Area so it would be sixth

[edit] Population Forecasts

I removed the following text from the article:

with an estimated population of 7,400,000[citation needed] as of early 2006. Of these people, 5,857,550 (July 1, 2006 est.) live in the Greater Toronto Area.[1]

because:

  1. I couldn't find a source for the 7.4M estimate (likely some interpolation from one of the cited population growth forecasts...in which case, it might be considered original research)
  2. without support for this claim, the GTA population has no context
  3. There is disagreement on the forecasting methods used (StatsCan vs PIR vs ...)[2]

I recommend waiting until the preliminary census of the population numbers are released in early 2007. -- Robocoder (talk | contribs) 20:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Western New York in the Golden Horseshoe

While I appreciate that a reference was found for the claim that Buffalo is part of the Golden Horseshoe, it is but one reference. I've looked for others, and haven't found any yet. For a claim like " Some consider the Buffalo, New York region to be part of the Golden Horseshoe", there needs to be more than a solitary unpublished, unreferenced paper on the subject. Wikipedia doesn't accept original research. Since the paper was part of a presentation about a Political Economy of Scale, there's a chance that someone has cited that paper, or used it as part of further research, which would lend the definition more credence. As it stands right now, it is one person's definition, and insufficient for inclusion. I welcome comments about this, though. Mindmatrix 15:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Niagara is NOT part of the outer Golden Horseshoe

Niagara is not part of the Outer Golden Horseshoe (and no, Hamilton is not GTA), regardless of what McGunity and his minions in Toronto may think. To back this argument:

  • Niagara has -always- been a part of the Golden Horseshoe, even before the creation of the Extended Golden Horseshoe.
  • The urban area of the Golden Horseshoe exists from Niagara Falls to Oshawa - albeit that the 'urban' area between St. Catharines and Hamilton is very narrow and close to the QEW, it is far from rural.
  • A number of urban development centres are defined within the Niagara Region (St. Catharines brownfield, Niagara Falls-Fort Erie) along with the GTA and Hamilton portions of the inner ring.
  • Niagara's economic ties with the rest of the region are much stronger than the extended portion, to the point where the MTO lumps Niagara in as part of the GTA for transit and traffic purposes.
  • Portions of Niagara exist -within- the GTA greenbelt.

Unless someone can come up with an explanation better than a single PDF file to throw away decades of history and economic development, the current format broken into three sections should remain. Snickerdo 02:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

In the absence of other official references, if we create our own groupings, that is original research. I think to alleviate this conflict, why don't we just list all the census divisions alphabetically without grouping them into inner and outer rings? --Polaron | Talk 02:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
That is an acceptable compromise. Still, as one of my friends puts it, "If it weren't for Niagara, the Golden Horseshoe wouldn't exist." This isn't original research - it's an historical term, of which Niagara has always been at the core along with Hamilton, Toronto and Oshawa. Snickerdo 02:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you since the original Census Region did include Niagara. I'm just trying to make sure what is stated in the article is verifiable and not original research. For that, we need citations and references. In any case, I'll leave it as it is now since I actually do think Niagara should be in the inner ring. --Polaron | Talk 02:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)