Portal:Montreal/Discussions/English Names

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents


[edit] Discussion: English Names

--due to my recent revalation about the existence of WP:UE, I realize that this discussion is moot. English names are used where they exist. Please see below for further details. --Larineso 16:11, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

There has been much disagreement over how to properly write Montreal street and place names in English. I would like to collaboratively create a Manual of Style for articles about Montreal. Unlike many officially francophone cities, such as Paris, Montreal has a long tradition of English. For centuries, there have been anglophones as well as francophones in this city. Because of this, although the anglophone population has diminished, they still have their own traditional, and formerly official names for places. It would be ridiculous to write these place names in their French form in English. I would like to point out that, when the English names were official, the French still used their own names. Would a Montreal francophone say "J'ai fait du shopping sur Saint Lawrence Street", "J'ai eu un incident sur le coin de Mountain Street et Doctor Penfeild Avenue", "J'ai acheté du thé en Chinatown", "Il a trouvé un très bon restaurant en Little Italy", or "Vous avez loué un appartement dans le Gay Village"? C'est ridicule!

Although French is the 'official' form, I would like to remind the reader that many places have different names in different languages, for example Rome, Kiev, London (Londres), Turin, Athens, and countless others. At the same time, because they are no longer official, there is a lack of cohesiveness in English names in Montreal. I propose a guide for 'anglicization' (or, 're-anglicization', in many cases) of place and street names in the city.

I am simply trying to create a system for writing the names already in use by anglophones. Please comment on it and add your two cents. However, please be sensitive to the fact that Montreal anglophones have the same right to their language and distinct identity as Montreal francophones. There has been much one-sidedness on other discussions on the subject. We must remember that we are first and foremost Montrealers, and other things after.


  • Firstly, the generic becomes English (rue ... becomes ... street).
  • Secondly, saints' names are translated: "Saint Catherine street", "Saint Lawrence boulevard". French-only names stay the same (Saint-Jacques street, since Jacques doesn't translate)
  • Thirdly, streets named after people or saints loose the hyphen (so boul. René-Levesque becomes René Levesque boulevard)
  • Streets with common noun names are translated, but with the official form in parenthesis on the first mention styled slightly differently, for example- "Park avenue (du Parc)", or "Mountain Sreet (de la Montagne)".
  • Streets whose names have always traditionally been French remain untranslated even in English (la Gauchetière, l'Acadie) remain the same.
  • For streets that remain French (rue de la Gauchetière, rue de l'Acadie) that have the "de la" or "de l'" construction, the most common English form is used. Normally, the 'de' is dropped but the article remains.


Place names will lose their accents (like Montréal-> Montreal), and hyphens, but the orthograph will not change, so that "Ville-Saint-Laurent" becomes "Ville Saint Laurent", and "Saint-Léonard" becomes Saint Leonard

For generic place names (Little Italy, Gay Village, Chinatown), the English name is used, so instead of Quartier Chinois, Chinatown. Instead of Village gai, Gay Village, and instead of petite Italie, Little Italy. Others Include: Old Montreal, The Plateau, the Latin Quarter, Pierre-Elliot Trudea International Airport, and the Gilles Villeneuve Racetrack, since old areas, plateaus, quarters, airports, and racetracks are common to many cities. However, "La Petite Patrie" doesn not change since it is unique to Montreal and is not a generic name applied across many places.

The articles would also be re-worked, with the French names re-directing to the English ones. For example, we have the article Crescent Street, but Boulevard Saint-Laurent. We have Chinatown (Montreal), but Village gai. This must be resolved before we begin to work on creating new articles. --Larineso 5 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)


Please place your comments/questions here (don't forget name and time stamp):


Why the debate? In a written work, the name of a street is simply what the street sign says. In Montreal, it is worth noting that many street names are differ in parlance depending on the language of the speaker. An anglophone may grow us saying 'Saint Catherine Street', while a Francophone will go with 'Rue Ste-Catherine'. It doesn't change what's on the sign, and shouldn't change how it is written in the article. Remember, an encyclopedia entry is not a conversation. But the spoken differences are worth noting.

[edit] Proposal

Articles that are often referred to in the French by anglophone Montrealers should have titles in French. Articles that are not often referred to in the French by anglophone Montrealers should have titles in English. We can establish whether an article is often referred to in the French by anglophone Montrealers through consensus.

In my experience, the following are often referred to in the French:

The following are not often referred to in the French:

I would argue that the following could fit in either category:

Perhaps I'm favouring the French, but this is what I and my friends use.

Cheers,

Acegikmo1 5 July 2005 19:51 (UTC)


Articles that are often referred to in the French by anglophone Montrealers should have titles in French. Articles that are not often referred to in the French by anglophone Montrealers should have titles in English. We can establish whether an article is often referred to in the French by anglophone Montrealers through consensus.
At first blush, this sounds right to me. The only thing I'd say is that Place Jacques-Cartier is distinguishable from the larger Old Port/Vieux Port neighbourhood.
Atlant 6 July 2005 00:06 (UTC)


I agree entirely about generic names (The Plateau, Old Montreal, etc.). But I think that we should keep the hypens and NOT translate Saint's names, since in my experience anglophones use the French much more commonly.
I'm up in the air about other streets. du Parc, de la Montagne, de Pins, etc. are referred to both in English and in French.
In general, I prefer the French terms, but I think we should also consider usage. Crescent Street, Old Port, etc. should be in English since the English is almost always used. Acegikmo1 5 July 2005 20:03 (UTC)


I agree with this idea, however, I propose that the English be used whenever it exists, simply because this is an English work. Also, I believe the French names should still use English orthography and style. For example, I saw maps today from the fourties showing "Saint Lawrence Boulevard", "Saint Viateur Boulevard", and "Saint Dominique Boulevard". What I mean is, the generic (Street, bldv, etc... you know the drill) should still change (since, in speaking, we never use them anyway), and there should be no hyphen. As for the "Sainte"s, I don't know whether to leave them or make them "Saint".
Also, I only ever say and hear said "Park Avenue", "Mountain Street", and "Pine Avenue". One time, a friend was visiting me from out of town. He was driving on Doctor Penfield and another friend of mine was directing him to turn onto Mountain Street. He couldn' find it. I finally realized after several minutes of overhearing a heated argument that my friend didn't know to look for "de la Montagne". As I have said to you before, Acegikmo, usage of the English or French name really depends on who you're talking to.
I think that maybe the best way to resolve street names is to refer to the pre-Francization names and follow their pattern of English/French. What do you think of this idea? It is, to my knowledge, very easy to find old maps of the important main streets and districts we are talking about... --Larineso 6 July 2005 03:09 (UTC)
Unless you're writing articles about the history of Montreal, this makes no sense to me. Your own anecdote explains how confusing it would be to the uninitiated to use translated street names that the City itself does not use. Remember that the readers of these articles are expected to be uninformed about their subjects!
If you're specifically preferring pre-Francization names, and not just English translations, then I would expect you to talk about Dorchester Street and not Boulevard Rene-Levesque. On the other hand, if you prefer English translations, I'd expect you to talk about the traffic on the Elysian Fields in an article about Paris. Neither seems to do any favors for Wikipedia's readers, and both should make someone encountering the articles for the first time to ask "Why don't they call the streets by the names on the signs?" Since locals will have an easier time resolving ambiguity than non-locals, write directed at the non-locals and use the same place names that English tourist guides and maps use, which looks to me what Acegikmo1 was getting at.
(Do you really mean to suggest that reading articles on modern Montreal will require having at hand old maps? Should we be discussing a policy for street names in Hochelaga?) mendel ☎ July 7, 2005 02:44 (UTC)
I don't mean using all the street names as they were 40 years ago. Dorchester has been renamed. Mountain Street was translated. Most anglophones I know still use English names for the streets. However, many streets' names were always French; L'Acadie, Saint Dominique... Just pronounced in an English way. What I mean about consulting old maps and 'using the pre-Francization names' is that we shouldn't translate those streets that were always French. However, all the streets that once had English names still do, they just aren't "official". Just like (to repeat an example I've used on other discussions about this), we say Kiev, not Kyiv; Rome, not Roma; Turin, not Torino (most Italian cities are this way). We have China and Japan, not Zhongguo and Nihon, Italy, Germany, Belgium, not Italia, Deutscheland, and La Belgique.
Likewise, we have Mountain street, not rue de la Montagne; Crescent Street, not rue du Croissant... Just as many cities, regions, countries, etc.. have different names in different languages, many of Montreal's streets have different names in English and French. --Larineso 7 July 2005 21:58 (UTC)
[I've fixed your indenting.] I understand what you're proposing, but I can't understand why one would do it that way. Your argument about "rue de Croissant" is a red herring; the City's street listing calls it rue Crescent, just like it calls the next street rue de la Montagne.
So, I'll try again: The streets currently have official names and those names are not universally English or French. Using the current official names will make the articles more useful for people wishing to learn about modern Montreal. Using the street's former names will confuse people wishing to learn about modern Montreal just like they confused the person you told the anecdote about. Ignoring Dorchester, you still haven't explained why one would not write about "Elysian Fields street" in Paris in this English encyclopedia under a policy like the one you propose!
In short: You propose using names other than those the City considers official for its streets. What benefit does that provide to Wikipedia's readers? — mendel ☎ July 8, 2005 01:53 (UTC)
You wouldn't use "Elysian Fields Street" because it is not used. Saint Lawrence Boulevard is used. Mountain Street is used. How do articles about Rome, Florence, Japan, Mount Everest, Italy, Saint Peter's, Greece, Saint Petersburg, Kiev, Londres, Venise, Russie help the reader when these are not official?
Why do we have articles about Christopher Columbus, King Victor Emmanuel II, Constantine, Alexander the Great, or Jesus and not Cristoforo Colombo, King Vittorio Emmanuele II, Gaius Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus, Megas Alexandros, and Yeshva? --Larineso 8 July 2005 19:09 (UTC)
You're the one that explained how confusing the former street names were in your anecdote, not me. Since you refuse to answer how your proposal helps Wikipedia readers to learn about Montreal, I'm not going to waste any more time here. As it stands, there is precisely one person who wishes to use street names that were changed by the city that the streets reside in. Best of luck with your campaign. — mendel ☎ July 8, 2005 20:13 (UTC)
How is the English name supposed to confuse people if the first line of the article says Saint Catherine Street (officially rue Sainte-Catherine)? --65.94.93.241 00:47, 10 July 2005 (UTC)


My name is Daniel. I'm an allophone residing in Laval but I am a Montreal history buff. Street names, believe it or not, are one of my hobbyhorses.

One of the writers proposed that all streets bearing saints' names be translated. I've noticed that while certain street names were translated from English into French, others were not and have always been referred to in French--even by anglophones. For instance, I think it would be an error to translate Sainte-Famille into Holy Family. For the record, rue Saint-Jacques is Saint James Street in English (one writer had said Saint-Jacques could not be translated). As for standards, I would support using the official names for districts/street names and perhaps placing the English name in parenthesis. Otherwise, there will be too many exceptions and too much confusion. I can tell you that some people--even anglophones--don't know the translated English name. I told a friend of mine last week to meet me up on Pine Avenue and he didn't understand. "Oh, des Pins," he said. "Why didn't you say so?" Anyways, a lot of it is discretion. Why do we translate Sainte-Catherine into Saint Catherine and not Saint-Christophe into Saint Christopher? I think partly why some street names, especially those with saints' names, are translated into English is because the English-French spelling is either the same or very close and people simply pronounce the French names in English. For example, Saint-Denis is often pronounced as Saint Dennis in English or Rue de la Visitation is pronounced as Visitation Street in English. Both streets are, however, among the most well-known "French" streets in Montreal.

I don't want to discount the English contribution to Montreal. But the goal of an encyclopaedia is both to be accurate and clear. When in doubt, use the official spelling. Oh, by the way, I'm not sure if I've put in my opinion in the right way. I've been using Wikipedia as a reference for a few months but have not been involved through writing or editing. Sorry if I got into the discussion through the backdoor by clicking the "Edit" button.

Daniel (12 July 2004 - 9:29 EST)


On another note, I read the main page on Montreal (not the article, but the WikiPortal page. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Montreal. I'm not sure who wrote it, but I think some information is flawed. The author strongly suggests that Montreal's economic decline and the "rise of Toronto" were brought about by the Quebec sovereignty movement. While the rise of the sovereignty movement did disrupt Montreal's growth, that statement is a gross oversimplification and is simply put, wrong. Any serious history student knows that Montreal was losing ground to Toronto as early as the 1890s, WWI or WWII (depending on who you ask) and that the completion of the Saint Lawrence Seaway was one of the last nails in the coffin. The Seaway meant that Montreal was no longer the farthest inland port ships could reach from the Atlantic. That happened in 1959. Thus many say that the Quiet Revolution, Mayor Drapeau, Expo and even the Olympics were Montreal's swanswong. The Commanding City, which was already fading, enjoyed a stay of execution for a decade because the stars aligned in its favour.
The myth of Montreal doing so well until 1976 when the PQ came into power has been propagated by the English-media. Many believe it. That can be noted. But to pass that myth off as a fact is wrong. I think everyone can agree, no matter your politics, that everything was not going perfectly until the separatists controlled the National Assembly. I think it should be changed and I didn't know where to bring it up.
Daniel
I believe I'm the person you're refering to as "one writer". Contrary to your impression, I recommend that we translate only those streets that have always had English names. For example, the article about Crescent Street was always called that, not "rue Crescent". Now, we can at the very least agree to use English generics like Street, Avenue (after the name), Boulevard (like avenue), Chinatown, Gay Village, etc...
As for translating the specific streets' names, again let me reiterate I only want to use those names that English speakers have always used. Also, to avoid confusion, I reommended having the official French name clearly written and pointed out. Taking into account others' comments, I would now say that we could have the various versions re-routing to "English name (French name)", in cases where the specific is different (Mountain- de la montagne would be "Mountain Street (rue de la Montagne)"). this would be unnecessary for Crescent Street or Fairmount Avenue, for example, where the Franch name is spelled the same.
As for your statement of "when in doubt, use the official name", I agree. However, there is no doubt that "Saint Lawrence Boulevard" is used in addition to "Saint-Laurent Boulevard". Because the English version exists, I say we should use it, just like we do with other place names. Saint Catherine, Mountain... they are used, we can all agree. So, there is no doubt. If someone wanted to change "L'Acadie Boulevard" to "Acadia Boulevard", I would disagree, because this is not used. As for Saint-Jacques, I meant untranslatable because the English version isn't a translation, but a completely different name (Saint James). In this case, I would call the article "Saint Jacques Street (Saint James Street)" or "Saint Jacques (Saint James) Street". Similarly, Dorchester isn't just a translation of Rene-Levesque, but a completely different name. Again, I might call this article "Rene Levesque Boulevard (Dorchester Boulevard)" or "Rene Levesque (Dorchester) Boulevard", or I might not mention the common English version in the title at all, as it is so different from the French, but only in the body.
As a sidenote, has anyone else noticed that all along Fairmount, the little white squares used to cover the English generics have come off, so instead of just saying "Fairmount", they all say "W. Fairmount Avenue" or "E. Fairmount Avenue"? It's very interesting. Just thought I'd add that since it seems mildly relative to this discussion. --Larineso 01:53, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I am firmly opposed to using the English names as titles, because I believe them to be useless. Here is some of what I've already said on the subject:
In addition to being official, the French also has the advantage that we know what form it should be. This is not the case in English. (Verdun Street? De Verdun Street? Saint-Laurent Blvd.? Saint Laurent Blvd? Saint Lawrence Blvd? The Main? du Parc Ave? Park Ave? de l'Assomption Blvd? Assomption Blvd? Assumption Blvd? What are you going to do, take an opinion poll?)
We can't just make up a standard to use and pretend it's real... De L'Acadie Blvd? L'Acadie Blvd? Acadie Blvd? D'Iberville Ave.? Iberville Ave.? I've seen them all.
If we were talking about an officially bilingual city like Ottawa, I would agree with you. But we're not. An encyclopedia is supposed to be authoritative, and someone trying to find "Pine Avenue" or "Saint James Street" on a modern map of Montreal is going to have a long search, no matter what English speakers call them - or used to call them.
when my friend Hamish first moved to the city, at one point he asked for directions, and someone told him that something was on the corner of "Pine Ave." Needless to say, he got completely lost, since not being from Montreal, he had no idea that "Pine Ave." was the same as Av. des Pins. You have to be a Montreal anglophone for a long time to know that kind of thing, and the vast majority of our readers are not Montreal anglophones. If they're looking for Park Avenue on a map, they will not find it. [Likewise, I lived in Montreal for more than six years before I realized that "Saint James Street" was the same as rue Saint-Jacques.]
In the main, the people who would use "Park Avenue" for Av. du Parc are Montrealers. But the English-speaking world extends beyond Montreal, and people outside Montreal do not know that "Park Avenue" is Av. du Parc.
The French names are the most commonly recognized ones for English speakers around the world simply because to actually find any of these places they will have to look at a map which will be labelled with the French names.
In sum, English Montrealers will find the English names unnecessary, and English non-Montrealers will find those names useless. There is no point in putting the English names on this list, not least because we can't agree on what they are.
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.
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
(Let me add that in the interest of fairness, this would mean that fr:wiki would not use common but unofficial French names, such as chemin Reine-Marie for chemin Queen Mary, or rue Université for rue University.)
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....
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 05:54, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

A relatively simple compromise would be use Canada Post's rules: the specific must always remain in official form, including hyphens. The generics "rue", "avenue", and "boulevard" may be translated to "Street", "Avenue", and "Boulevard" respectively; other generics are left in French. Directions at the end of the name may be translated: "Sainte-Catherine Street West". This compromise avoids weird forms like "rue University", which just looks bizarre in English, and makes sentences read more naturally. This compromise will also avoid confusing newcomers, as few streets in Montreal are distinguished by the generic and directions, and, as has been said, local custom is to completely omit them in informal speech and writing. In cases where the generic is joined to the specific by French prepositions or articles, it may preferable to translate nothing, but capitalize the first letter, as is customary for proper nouns in English: "Rue De La Gauchetière Ouest", "Rue de la Montagne", "Avenue du Parc". Indefatigable 21:52, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I don't find "rue University" weird at all, any more than "Town of Port aux Basques," and I don't see why it would be any weirder in English than it is in French. Your compromise seems sensible, but I don't see the point of writing "Sainte-Catherine Street" and "chemin de la Côte-des-Neiges" in the same document. I can't fathom why it isn't acceptable to use the official names in all cases, as we do for other cities. - Montréalais 22:24, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
My sugestion would be to use the Canada Post format for all street names, eg "Sainte-Cathrine Street West", "Du Parc Avenue", "Chemin de la Côte-des-Neiges". This is the format used by the federal government and many corperations when writing to anglophone citizens/clients, and is probably the only standard form of street names in English. - Farquard 19:24, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
"Du Parc Avenue" is nonsense. The name doesn't refer to someone called Du Parc, it refers to the parc. It's not like Rue De Castelnau, where the man's name was De Castelnau. I'm reluctant to take advice on toponymy from an agency that obviously doesn't understand French place names in the slightest. This is the problem: even besides the fact that no such names are official, there isn't any system for anglicizing the names that doesn't make hash out of them. - Montréalais 03:50, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

To return to the Saint-Jacques Street issue, Jacques and James are the same name. In Italian, it's Giacomo and in Spanish it's Tiago. Almost any saint name can be translated into another European language unless the name is really an obscure, regional one. That's why we cannot trust "usage" as authoritative. I've never heard anyone say Saint James Street instead of Saint-Jacques, however, on the southeast corner of Saint-Jacques and Côte-de-la-Place-des-Armes in Old Montreal, you'll see "Saint-James Street" etched into one of the buildings. Since Saint-Jacques was the "Wall Street" of Canda until WWII, it makes sense that the English-version of the name would be used by the predominately English business establishment in this city.

PS. The Portal page reads better now. But most allophones today are "basically" trilingual.

Daniel (17 July 2005 2:33 PM EST)

Firstly, Montrealais, you are obviously unaware of the concensus that exists within the anglophone community of Montreal regarding street names. It's L'Acadie Boulevard (pronounced somewhat like /lACKady/, if you must know), Pine Avenue, Park avenue, Mountain Street (which some say was named after Bishop Mountain, FYI), Queen Mary Road, Lakeshore Road (you can see the "Chemin ... Road" construction in Ville Saint-Laurent), La Gauchetiere, City Hall (not Hotel de Ville- once part of a group of three streets- City Hall, City Councillors, and Mayor Street), University, etc..
Montrealais, I understand fully your opinion, but I feel you are being one-sided. We both know that it really won't be hard at all to agree on English names- the article will have an English name the creator decided on (usually there is only one clear version anyway). If there is controversy (for example over whether to write de L'Orimier or L'Orimier), then it can be quickly resolved through a much less hot-and-bothered discussion than this one.
Also, I feel that you are being unfair to anglophones. It's not about "the poor monolingual...", it's about the English speakers who have peacefully co-habited this city with French speakers since the formation of Canada. Those people have their own names for things. Those people also constitute 20% of the population. Francophones, now at 53%, will be a minority at 48.8% by 2011, and Anglos will be at 25% (as you can read about here: [2]). Montreal has always been different from Quebec, and it is silly to impose French Language Laws on a population that is barely majority French anyway. Now, I am not here to argue the validity of the French Language Charter, but to compell you to accept using traditional English names. Montreal is not Paris, London, Rome, or Kiev. Anglophones are as native to the city as Francophones are. Now, I'm sorry that Francophones were once held down by Anglos controlling the economy, but I do NOT have to pay for their sins. While the Molsons were settling in on Summit Circle (still not Cercle du Sommet) and supposedly oppressing French people throughout the city, my grandparents were living in the poorest region of Italy, in 3rd World conditions. Please don't think I'm some out of touch Montreal White-Rhodesian from Hamstead. I live in Saint Leonard.

Really? In your short life you have read to much disinformation that certain elements of Quebec society have become masters at producing --- including their edits here at Wikipedia. Francophones held down is pure distorted myth. Let anyone make a list of these "suppressions", most of which were supposedly the Americans, and you will find they are exactly the same type of conduct applied by business leaders around the world at the time. I challenge someone to make a list right here and I will draw an exact parallel for the conduct by American, British, French, Belgian, German, Spanish, etc. businessmen in other countries. In fact, it was much, much worse elsewhere. In Vietnam, Algeria, India, the Belgian Congo, it was a foreign government in charge and the native people had zero say. French Canadians had total control of the Provincial Government, Prime Ministers of Canada, and always the second largest contingent in the Federal Cabinet. Whatever real complaints exist in business in Quebec's past in fact relate to management/labour relations. Americans spoke and still speak English wherever they invest. Lack of management jobs of French Canadians is a result of education, not bias, prejudice or other such falacies. A. Lafontaine 15:56, 27 July 2005 (UTC)


I read your personal page today. You are a proud gay man. I find this highly commendable in a society where being gay is still very difficult. I ask you; knowing what it is to be discriminated against, I'm sure, does it make sense that English should be written-out in law? Just because we are part of a rich, Western society, doesn't mean we don't have some pretty stupid laws. Laws like the ones you referred to, which essentially try to undo two centuries of English culture in Montreal. Do you want to support a law which, at its core, is intended to suppress a culture, an identity? I don't identify much with Canada, less with Quebec. I am a Montrealer, and I am an anglo one. I can go anywhere in this city and not have to speak French, yet, on the internet, which should be outside the realm of petty language laws, I must switch my keyboard to French and type in an accented name to get an article about Saint Helen's Island?
Maybe Jacques Parizeau would like a spycam in my bedroom to make sure I'm not propagating the English race? The more you read the French Language Laws, the more this sounds like the rumblings of a second Holocaust. I don't feel that my ancestors left pre-industrial, post-war Italy and anti-semite Ukraine to come here and start a new life where their children and grandchildren, who they had put into the English school system, would be oppressed and have their identity, essentially, made illegal, do you?
As for "confusing visitors", let me point out two things. Firstly, if you listen to the Traffic Report on Mix 96 or Q92 (the two main English radio stations), they use "Saint Denis (said like Saint Dennis)", the Pine-Park Interchange, and the L'Acadie (lACKady) Circle. They talk about stores on Saint Catherine Street, and are split between Saint Lawrence and Saint Laurent. There goes six of the most contested street names. Mountain Street is obvious. Everyone uses it. You yourself said that you know Saint-Jacques is often called Saint James. Eight down. I would say the remaining candidates are less contentious.
Secondly, you wrote that we need not make allowances for "the poor, suffering monolingual reader to whom the word "rue" apparently presents an insurmountable barrier". I say we should not make allowances for the visitor who has so little interest in the city as not to know the English names. If they are on Wikipedia, everyone will know them. They will also be very able to recognize the French street sign because, the first thing that every street article will say is "Saint Lawrence Boulevard (officially boul. Saint-Laurent)". I think that if people are stupid enough to only look at the title and not the first sentence, then they deserve to be lost on Doctor Penfield looking for Mountain Street.
You wrote "someone trying to find "Pine Avenue" or "Saint James Street" on a modern map of Montreal is going to have a long search, no matter what English speakers call them"
Sure. But, they will have an easy time finding "W. Fairmount Avenue" and "E. Fairmount Avenue", now that the little white stickers put over the English parts during "Francization" have faded away. The legislation you refer to continually has little bearing on the idea of Free Speech, by which all publications should be written. --Larineso 00:51, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm a latecomer to this argument, but after having spent a year and a half living in Montreal among a group of people split fairly evenly between the French and Anglo communities, perhaps I could try to add my two cents, for whatever its worth.
I have found that older English Montrealers refer to things with much greater tendency with English names, but that younger English speakers tend to refer to things with French names. I have tended to hear Old Port or Vieux Montreal, and I would lean towards calling it Vieux Montreal myself. I find the argument over rue/street almost non-sensial, there are very few instances that I could think of that the people I know or myself would refer to something called "rue" as street. I have noticed that most English speakers tend to drop the word "rue" or "street" completely when referring to street names, so it becomes "Drive down 'St-Laurent' and turn right on 'René-Levesque'". However, as these streets are to officially be called rue, and I have seen that most English Montrealers refer to things as rue, I believe that naming trend should continue
To that end, I think that the most common name across both languages should be used, but with a preference towards the official name. Don't assume that Wiki users are stupid, because they aren't. They seem to make out just fine in articles on other cities in other countries that use their native countries' naming practices. No-one seems to recommend that we rename Damrak or Tiergarten to an English equivalent! Páll (Die pienk olifant) 18:32, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I would refer everyone in this discussion (especially Montrealais) to WP:UE.

As I had suggested earlier (before I knew about the Wikipedia naming convention), the French name shall be included in the first line of the article. Anyone who would like to contribute to a Montreal Manual of Style (like those for Ireland-, Japan-, and China-related articles.), please leave me a message on my talk page. I invite everyone, even Montrealais, to contribute.

Thank you for an entertaining discussion, but the point now seems moot. English names must be used where they exist and are common. Even ones like Saint Lawrence Boulevard, Saint Helen's Island, etc.., which may be contentious, are very often used in English, even on the radio and news. For this reason, even though it is nearly impossible to decide which is "more" common, I would say that they are equally common and we should use the English name. Thank you everyone for your comments. I invite you to continue this discussion if you have reason to. --Larineso 16:11, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Certainly "Park Avenue", "Mountain Street", "Saint Lawrence Boulevard", etc., are widley used amongst anglos, however so are "Du Parc Avenue", "De la Montange Street", "Saint-Laurent Boulevard" and such. Of course nobody uses french gererics in english sentances (have you ever heard anyone say "It's on the corner of boulevard Saint-Laurent and rue Sherbrooke"?). However, in some cases (eg Saint-Jacques St., De l'Eglise St.) the french name is far more common than the english one, so I think that in order to be consistant we should always use the french name with the english generic, like Canada Post does. Although we might want to translate "chemin" to "road" which CP doesn't for some odd reason. - Farquard 18:30, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
Farquard, I agree that Saint-Jacques, De L'Eglise, etc.. are common, but I think we should have them without accents and hyphens, and with the english name in brackets (like René Lévesque (Dorchester) Boulevard, so "De L'Eglise (Church) Street", "Saint Jacques (Saint James) Street"). I also think we should always use English generics. As for Du Parc, De La Montagne, Des Pins, etc.., these are never used with the English generic (ex. Du Parc Avenue). I think that would just be awkward, and should be made to conform with other names, which are in English, especially since they aren't the most common, but rather one of the most common (I would say English and French are both used about equally). Saint Lawrence Boulevard is another one in this situation. I think it should stay English becuase it is impossible to say that one version is more common than the other, so it should just be made to conform with the other names by default. Thanks for you comments. --Larineso 22:34, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
I don't even know where to begin with this. Let me just say that I find your ludicrous appeals to my identity to be misguided (I've never had anyone threaten to murder me for being an anglophone, thank you), your assumptions about my knowledge insulting, and your characterization of the language laws hysterical. None of them have no relevance whatever to the discussion. I am not interested in using French names out of some notion of linguistic purity.
I am interested in using them because they are the official names. They are a reference point, an established standard that we can use in order to keep everyone from doing his or her own thing without any coordination or consistency.
I remain confused as to why people are continually using as evidence what English speakers say. Surely we accept that what people say and what they write, let alone what they write in an encyclopedia, are quite different things that follow quite different standards.
French-language names do not lend themselves gracefully to translation into English. Guidelines promulgated for this practice rarely take into account any notion of the structure or etymology of the names. We are setting ourselves up for a giant dog's breakfast, in which we make spectacles of ourselves translating names higgledy-piggledy with no standardization because there is no standard.
I might concede the fight for the titles of articles, but I really have to insist that streets mentioned in articles, especially less significant ones, be left in the official versions; otherwise we will find ourselves with fractal unofficial translations for every alley and pocket park on the island. That's an outcome that I would not be able to accept under any circumstances.
It would also be completely unacceptable to omit accents from street names. Église, Préfontaine, Lévesque, Vendôme, Côte are spelt with accents, and that's an end to it. Even if we were to decide to translate generics, "Eglise" is neither a translated word nor a standard English form (such as "Montreal") and must retain its accent (to say nothing of "Cote," which would be a completely different word in French from "Côte"). Removing accents is out of the question whatever practices we adopt. - Montréalais 01:37, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
Let me first say that many people's lives were threatened for being anglophones/federalists. It was called the October Crisis. My assumptions about your knowledge are exactly zero in number, besides the knowledge I would expect someone to have about Montreal after living there. My characterizetion of the French language laws isn't ridiculous, they are- Why should someone be forced to go to school in the language of only 53% of the population of the city, when they could go to school in the language of 97% of the continent? How can a multinational corporation be expected to serve its 300 million English-speaking customers if it must answer the phone in French? How many tax dollars went to changing street signs in a petty display of playground revenge could have gone to healthcare?
But you are absolutely right, that has no bearing on this discussion. I digress. More to the point:
As for your idea of wanting to use French because it is official, I would point out that on Wikipedia, official names are not used, common names are used- as is clearly stated in WP:UE, Wikipedia's Naming Convention.
All I am asking is that we respect this publication's established conventions. And, in English, the accents are always omitted. Please see Montreal, Quebec, and Baton Rouge, Louisiana articles.
No, in English, accents are not always omitted. The names you cite are particular cases whereof the accentless form has a long history, which is not the case for, say, Côte-des-Neiges or Église, let alone a personal name such as Préfontaine, Vendôme, Crémazie, or Lévesque. My Canadian Oxford gives Trois-Rivières, Sept-Îles, Rivière-du-Loup, and for that matter, roué and fiancée. The Globe and Mail Style Guide says that accents remain; The Canadian Style has no rule on accents but uses examples throughout the book in which accents remain. The Gazette, that bastion of anglo-Montreal culture, uses accents. En:Wikipedia itself uses accents all over the place. There is no rule that English text be devoid of accents. Quite the contrary. - Montréalais 02:55, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
I am not saying we must translate French names, I am saying we must use English names already in existence. Thank you for you input, Montrealais. --Larineso 02:33, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise?

Hello,

It's nice to see that serious debate is being undertaken on this topic. Might I suggest that we work toward trying to formulate a coherent policy on English names in Montreal?

I propose the following, based on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) and the discussion above.

First, for general place names, English should be used. As I've proposed above, this would apply to :

This complies with the "use English" policy above, and it's also the policy followed by other encyclopedias.

If we can agree on this, then I think the discuss should turn to which places should have English names and which should have French names.

Montréalais, I tend to agree with you in that I prefer the French names outside general places because they are the official names. But I also think that usage is an important criterion, and we should try to follow Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) as much as we can, which takes usage into account.

Larineso, I don't think that WP:UE makes the debate moot. After all, the page also states, "Only use the native spelling as an article title if it is more commonly used in English than the anglicized form". So I think our task here should be to use our knowledge to determine in which cases the French is more often used.

Do we agree?

Acegikmo1 04:11, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

What do you mean by "general place names"? - Montréalais 04:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
I think I meant to say "generic place names", like Gay Village, Chinatown, etc. that can be found in many cities. Since these are almost exclusively referred to in Enlgish by Anglophones, I think the articles should have English titles. Acegikmo1 04:32, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
I'm not strongly opposed to the use of English for these place names. - Montréalais 04:34, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. As I've stated above, I feel pretty strongly that we should use the French for most street names, especially Saint-Laurent and Saint-Denis. On the other hand, I feel that Cresent Street should have an English title because of the almost exclusive English usage. I think the real question will come when we start talking about streets like du Parc, de la Montagne, de Pins, etc. (or even Sainte-Catherine) for which both the English and the French are used. I tend to prefer French in these cases, because that's what I'm more used to hearing. What are your thoughts? Acegikmo1 04:47, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'd note that the official name is rue Crescent, so we're not talking about translating the generic in that case. Like you, I am far more used to hearing French specifics, even when used with English generics (Saint-Laurent boulevard, Saint-Jacques street; it's on the corner of du Parc and des Pins; he lives on de l'Église.)
My feeling is that we should not translate for the sake of translating. I would prefer that as much of the name remain in the official form as possible, because the official is the most likely to be useful. - Montréalais 05:37, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Montréalais, in response to what you said above about the difference between standards for what people write and what they say, I'd like to point out most written sources do use English generics when talking about Montreal streets. As I've mentioned already the official form for addresses is to use the English generics "Street", "Avenue" & "Boulevard". The Gazette [3] and the Globe and Mail [4], both use similar forms, although they also use "Road" (not "Chemin") and the common forms (eg "Park Ave.") for the handfull of major streets that are known as such. I also checked the Encyclopedias at my local library. Grolier (2003 edition) mentions "Ste. Catherine Street", "De Maisonneuve Boulevard" and "René Lévesque Boulevard" in its article on Montreal, whereas Brittanica (1985 edition) uses forms such as "Boulevard Saint-Laurent (St. Lawrence Boulevard)", "Île de Montréal (Montreal Island)", "Île Sainte-Hélène (St. Helen's Island)" and "Vieux-Montréal (Old Montreal)". Encarta Online's article on Montreal [5] mentions "St. Lawrence Boulevard", "Sherbrooke Street" and "Saint Denis Street", although oddly it also says "Rue Sainte-Catherine (Saint Catherine Street)". However, I agree with you entirely that whatever form we use, we sould not remove accents from names except for rare cases like "Montreal" were it is common use to do so. - Farquard 23:21, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Firstly, I am glad that someone has finally tried to create a compromise, which was the original intention of this debate. When I said WP:UE rendered this debate moot, I was referring to the idea that French should be used because it is official. What is official has no bearing, as we can all agree.
As for the specifics of what you are saying: You say that the French should be prefered because it is official. I say the English should be prefered because it is the language of this publication.
I think we can agree that, for cases such as Pine, Park, Mountain, etc.. That, because usage is probably around 50/50, we should use the English version. Actually, re-reading that, some people probably won't agree.. I think the major point is whether we should prefer French or English, and then everything falls into place. I think that we should use English when it exists and is common.
I think the main difference between people who say "du Parc", "de la Mtgne", and "des Pins", etc..., is that they are not natives of the city. Is that true? It seems that people who come from away are never exposed to the Anglophone names. They get by using the French ones, and are understood. I, on the other hand, as a native English-speaker, didn't know the "de la Montagne" existed until I saw a street sign on what I knew as Mountain Street (that was a while ago ;). So, what shall we prefer? Sounding like a foreigner or sounding like a native?
For those of you who will say "French is the "native" name, you idiot!", I would like to point out that English-speakers are also natives, and, if you are an English-speaker, you will probably mingle mostly with other English-speakers. I don't know how many foreign visitors to Montreal are bilingual..
What I'm saying is, we should be using local names. Since the Wikipedia is in English, we should use the names that local Anglophones use. We're not talking about going to a non-English-speaking place and translating all the names. We are talking about a place that has native English-speakers.
In terms of what is useful and what would confuse visitors, they'll be "confused" either way, because the whole thing is confusing. They might read about Mountain but not be able to find it, or they might be told something's on Mountain and not know what that is. What we have to realize, however, is that confusion will be (and is) minimal, and unavoidable. If both names are mentioned in the opening, like "Saint Lawrence Boulevard (boul. Saint-Laurent) ...", then there can't really be a problem. The generics pose no problem whatsoever, as no one ever says them and they appear very small on street signs. If "Mountain Street (rue de la Montagne) ..." isn't clear enough, then I don't know what is.
I even question how easy it really is to think that "Mountain" and "Montagne" or "Park" and "Parc" are different. I mean, besides one dense American acquaintance of mine, I have never heard of anyone mixing them up. And, while some argue that the French name should be the title to ease consulting maps and roadsigns, I would counter with the fact that people need to be made aware of the English names to understand that aspect of Anglo culture- besides, how many tourists drive in a foreign city anyway?
In the end, you can say either name in either language and you will be understood. With both names bolded and in the first line of an article, it is nearly impossible not to know the French name for navigational purposes ( it's right there, on the first line!). It is a matter, then, of deciding to favour what is "official" and what is "local" (English local, however). Considering that, at around 400.000, Montreal's Anglophone population is enough to populate several small cities, we're not talking about some tiny "ethnic group". All of the streets with English names are main ones, and, for those who really don't understand the whole bilingual name thing, they can ask anyone where "Park Avenue" is, and be told "you're on it".
I think it is safe to say we can use the accepted English names for major streets like Saint Lawrence, Saint Denis (which is exactly the same as the French anyway), Saint Catherine (no one will even notice if the "e" is there or not, anyway), De Maisonneuve, L'Acadie (both of which stay the same, I don't know why I mention them...), Cathedral (again, only a matter of a missing 'e'), Doctor Penfield (don't the signs just say "Dr.-Penfield", anyway?), President Kennedy (just an accent in difference), etc...
When you say, Farquard, that the accents and hyphens should never be omitted except in "certian cases", I disagree. I mean, usually, when a name is in English, the hyphens and accents are dropped. Mail gets addressed to Saint Leonard in English. However, I agree that in many (maybe most) cases, the hyphens and accents stay (like Ville Saint-Laurent). Again, it varies from one name to another. Obviously, names like René Lévesque and Paul-Émile Lamarche (just happened to be in my mind) should keep their accents, since they are proper names. I mean that the hyphens that link together nouns in street/place names should be dropped, as is commonly done, when speaking English. Proper nouns, like La Gauchetière, should keep the accent. Hyphens that are part of a person's name, as in "Paul-Émil", should be kept. But, let me reiterate, it depends on usage. I have hardly ever seen an address written in English that said "Saint-Léonard" (by English address, I mean one which says, for ex.,
"5860 E Jean Talon Street
Saint Leonard, QC
H1S ..."
which are more common than we sometimes realize), however, I have never seen "Saint-Laurent" (the town) writtten as "Saint Laurent", although that may also be used.
In terms of the Island of Montreal, Mount Royal, Saint Helen's Island, etc.., these are names of geographical features, and I really don't think we'd (we being this community) look very smart moving Island of Montreal to Ile de Montreal, because then we might as well change Alps to Alpes, if you know what I mean... Not that this was brought up before- I'm just adding another viewpoint. Ile Notre-Dame I can understand making French, as there is no accepted English name, and it isn't really as much a geographical feature as a man-made devellopment...
Anyway, I am glad that this discussion has taken a turn towards seriously resolving this problem, and I welcome all comments, and thank those who have participated. --Larineso 00:37, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Here are a few things that I really must insist should remain in the official form:

  • Names with the generic "place." Practically all of these, as far as I am able to determine, are referred to in English speech in their official form (variously pronounced): place Saint-Henri, place d'Armes, place des Patriotes -- likewise for building such as Place Bonaventure, Place Ville-Marie, Place des Arts.
  • With regards to accents, not only proper nouns (such as René Lévesque) but also French words that are retained (such as Côte-des-Neiges or de l'Église).
  • Names of metro stations.

I would very strongly prefer to leave in the official form:

  • Streets where the specific is one word with an articulation, and where the French articulation is most often retained in English. Avenue de l'Église; Rue de la Savane. All attempts at anglicizing these lead to bastardy, I am afraid. (Names with nobiliary particles, such as De Maisonneuve, would be acceptable for De Maisonneuve Boulevard.)
  • In general, non-famous streets or other features that are very unlikely to be the subject of an article and are given primarily as geographical referents (in addresses, for example).

- Montréalais 07:44, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Larineso, I think the problem with using English "when it exists and is common" is that it is difficult to determine when it is common. For example, in my experience "Saint Lawrence Boulevard" is rather rare, whereas "Park Avenue" is quite common. However other people might think that "Saint Lawrence" is common or that "Park Ave." is rare.
I hadn't actually given much thought to hyphens, but you're right that they are usually droped in English, however accents usually aren't. There are exceptions and I think "Saint Leonard" would be one of them, but for names like "De l'Église" or "Île Notre Dame" they should be retained.
Montréalais, I agree entirely with your first three points. I don't think there is any other English form of names like "Place Saint Henri" or "Place d'Armes". However, I would suggest that the intial "P" should be capitalized, as are all proper nouns in English.
As I've said already, forms like "De l'Église Street" are used by Canada Post, as well as in the Gazette and the Hour (the Mirror omits generics entirley). If they can use them we should be able to as well.
I don't see any point in using English generics for famous streets and French generics for non-famous streets. Specifics (ie the actual names) for non-famous streets should definately be the same in wikipedia as they are on street signs, even if certain famous streets aren't (although I think those should be too). - Farquard 22:43, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
I agree that metro stations should stay the same. I accept "Place ...", but with a capitalized "P" always. As for accents, as Farquard says, it should be on a case-by-case basis. I know that it is usually omitted from Saint Leonard, for example. In other cases, it may be kept. I know that many anglophones omit accents entirely, but I am willing to concede that most French words can keep their accents, except for obvious ones (like Saint Leonard, which we have already mentioned too many times...). As for hyphens, they are pretty much always omitted. It is very rare to keep them.
I think the English generic should always be used, as it is always used by anglophones. As for "de la Savanne", well- that's exactly how I say it! De la Savane Street, De L'Eglise Street (or just Church Street), De L'Orimier, De L'Epee (pronounced /duh-LEHP-pee/, if I'm feeling really anglo). However, I would only ever say "L'Acadie Boulevard". Again, this varies, but only one usage is obvious in each case.
Farquard, you pointed out something very important. You said that, to different people, different forms are 'common'. This is why, I would say we should use the English names that exist and are understood (to revise my previous statements), since "common" varies and is hard, if not impossible, to ascertain. I know everyone understands Saint Lawrence, even if they say "Saint Laurent" (which is pretty uncommon for me to hear, but common for you). Whereas, saying Saint Andrew for Saint Antoine or Saint James for Saint Jacques will probably draw blank stares from most.
As for "non-famous" streets, they should follow the rule of loosing hyphens, keeping accents, and having English generic. This makes them as they are "commonly used", but also highly readable (as the generic is small or simply left out of street signs and the hyphens are unnecessary for comprehension, so the name still looks the same). So, "rue Albert-Lozeau" would be written in an article as "Albert Lozeau Street". That is the way English-speakers would say/write it, and also basically the same as the street sign (which has no "rue" on it). Larineso 00:23, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
I would like to make an additional suggestion: perhaps when the English form is different from the official form, we may wish to use the official specific in addition to the English form in the case of geographical referents. I chose to do this in the Plateau-Mont-Royal article, where I thought people would be most likely to be hunting for streets on a map, so wrote "...Pine Ave. (av. des Pins)..." This would not be as necessary if we were mentioning the street 'for itself,' as it were, particularly if it had an article that was linked to.
Also, perhaps a small point, but all English-named articles should have a redirect from the official name, and the official name should be in bold, not italics. It is a name that could be and frequently is used in English, but that we are choosing not to. Thus: "Saint Catherine Street (officially Rue Sainte-Catherine)..." - Montréalais 16:04, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
That sounds like a good idea. I think it would be good to come up with a list of streets which have an English version that is commonly understood. The only ones I can think of are:
  • Pine Avenue
  • Park Avenue
  • Mount Royal Avenue
  • Saint Lawrence Boulevard
  • Mountain Street
  • Doctor Penfield Avenue
  • Lakeshore Road
  • Saint John's Boulevard
I don't think Sainte Catherine Street should be on the list since its more a matter of pronuncation then a different name. Its normally written with the "e" in English. If there are any other you think should be there, let us know. - Farquard 19:08, 28 July 2005 (UTC) 19:05, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
I only would call it Saint Catherine Street. Precisely because it is said as "Saint Catherine" and because it hardly makes a difference. In such cases I think we should use the ENglish type spelling, but it is a minor point, anyway.--Larineso 17:00, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Draft policy

I've created a draft policy. Tell me what you think and if there are any cases I've left out. - Montréalais 22:34, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

It's complex, but English/French issues tend to be. Running over the problem examples I've thought of resolves them all to things that casual passers-by would be able to easily figure out, without standing out too much from what editors would expect from WP:UE. Nicely done. — mendel ☎ 23:26, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
Very well done. This is better than I expected. I have a few minor points. First, I don't see why "Square Victoria" should be an exception, since in my experiance most anglos call it Victoria Square. (The metro station, of course, should be "Square-Victoria".) Second, I see the logic of using French names for Cegeps and Universities, but using "Hôpital" or "Église" in an English sentance seems as weird as using "rue" or "chemin". Other than that its a good policy, and seems to cover pretty much any case that would come up. - Farquard 22:59, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
I've never heard anyone call it Victoria Square. I've always heard it called Square Victoria. That's all. - Montréalais 07:07, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
Montrealais, I am... speechless. I am not only impressed, but proud that this long debate has finally yielded something tangible. Thank you for your considerable contribution. It is strangely touching to see that someone not even born here cares enough to even take the time to do this. The fact that you did it so well astounds me.
As a matter of fact, no matter how hard I look, I can find but a few small details to discuss ;), but they aren't very important. I have laid that out on the article's talk page, but, as I said, it's just a few minor points.
I'm kind of bummed that you beat me to it, but glad you did at the same time. By bringing into agreement the most outspoken proponents for each side of the debate, you have effectively ended it. Not only that, but you have prevented future altercations. Again, let me reiterate how grateful I am, and how much the Wikipedia community owes you (well, at least this small corner of it.) --Larineso 17:29, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
I feel bad about saying so after your compliments, but I do have to reiterate that it is against my better judgment to use the unofficial names. But as you said, it's probably time I pick my battles.... and of course I can keep using the official names on my website. So when the wars inevitably start up again, I'll leave you to fight for the English-names faction ;)
For what it's worth, I strongly consider myself a Montrealer; beyond my living nearly half my life here, my parents met on the 80 Av. du Parc bus and were married at the Birks Chapel at McGill. Besides which, topography is a special interest of mine. - Montréalais 01:08, 3 August 2005 (UTC)


Congratulations on the compromise. The draft document looks pretty good but I think something should be clarified: "These streets should be generally referred to by their modern form, except in appropriate historical references". I would change "generally" to "always". The appropriate historical reference exception is the only one that matters. Anyone who otherwise refers to René-Levesque as Dorchester is just stubbornly ignoring the fact that Levesque's separatist friends in City Hall decided to rename the street for him after he died. While it may be endearing to hear an older person (like my grandmother) call René-Levesque Dorchester or call Berri-UQAM métro Berri-De Montigny, it's not correct.

Daniel

I'm sorry, I just read the draft, and I disagree with it completely. Rue should never be translated as street, the official name of something is "rue". And in all the time I spent in Montreal, I never heard any anglos purposefully switch "rue" to street. The official language of Montreal is French! How are we going to deal with things like Docteur Penifield? Make it Doctor Penifield? There is no logic that I can see to rename things to such an anglo-centric position. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 19:12, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Oh my God... You have got to be kidding! In case you didn't notice, there are about 50kb's worth of discussion above dealing with this exact fact.
Please read the discussion. The Wikipedia Community has decided to use names as they are used by Montreal's NATIVE ANGLOPHONE POPULATION. I hope it is clear (don't take the all-caps as yelling, just trying to make it stand out more). "Docteur-Penfield" has been called Doctor Penfield since it was opened, always. According to Wikipedia's Naming Policy, WP:UE, what is "official" has no bearing on Wikipedia articles. What is commonly used is what matters, and, in English in Montreal, the English names are and have always been used. The city streets all were called by the English generic until maybe 30 years ago. No one is " renaming" anything. It's nothing "new".
However, all this has been discussed above. While your opinion is understandable, by reading through the (sometimes agitated) discussion, I believe you will understand the depth of this issue. Everyone else involved has been pleased by the outcome (the Draft Policy created by Montrealais), and I think that, if you take the time to fully understand the discussion and take a close look at the Policy, you will feel the same way. --Larineso 21:43, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
I have to agree with Mr. Páll. I'd prefer that we not translate "rue" considering most Anglophones simply drop "rue" or "street" or whatever from the name entirely and "rue" is the official title. Of course, I support the draft policy and am willing to implement it, as it has created a consensus. But I don't think that Páll's objection should be dismissed; I agree with what he has to say. Acegikmo1 21:47, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
I don't get this at all. Given everything else it contains, you think that calling a street "street" in the English wikipedia is reason to not adopt this policy? I agree that Anglo Montrealers tend to not use either of "rue" or "street", but this isn't about articles directed at Anglo Montrealers, it's about articles directed at the entire Internet. I think it's critical to use French proper names so that a connection between this article and street signs can be made, but why use French that you won't find on a map in an English encyclopedia? Does it help a unilingual English speaker to know that a marijuana protest was held at "Carré St-Louis" instead of "St Louis Square", or that Nick Auf Der Maur had an alley off of "rue Crescent", not "Crescent Street", named after him? Are English Wikipedia readers who are unfamiliar with Montreal really going to benefit from "Carré and "rue" being there, or will it make the article more opaque? — mendel ☎ 02:15, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
Very well-put, Mendel. The usage of English generics is a basic part of this agreement. No Montrealer, or any English speaker, would think of or call a street in our city a "rue". This is ridiculous. The policy is perfect: it recognizes the commonly used English names, while still facilitating map and geographical referencing.
Many non-native Montrealers find French names "cute", and think they have some kind of cachet. This is not a reason to name these articles in French.
This isn't Paris, and these areas have perfectly good English names already in use. If user Pall did not hear the English names while visiting, then I suggest he pay more attention. They are in everyday use throughout the city. Many Francophones also use English names while speaking English. This isn't some extension of Language Wars. What is "official" is besides the point- it doesn't matter to anyone else. As stated above, Rome, Florence, Venice, Italy, Kiev, Marseilles, Sicily, Lombardy, etc.. are all uncofficial, but commonly used.
While it is true that most Montrealers (in either language) omit the generic, this doesn't mean we should call a street "rue". If those Montrealers were forced to add a generic in speaking, which would they add? "Rue", or "Street"? Obviously, "street", as you can see on most addresses directed at the English-speaking population. --Larineso 14:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NN Delete

English names for streets only get 100-200 google hits, most of which are wikipedia, mirrors and the occaisional hotel.

Kim Bruning 03:58, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re-opening discussion

I have read and re-read the discussion on this page and am left with unsatisfied by the resolution and policy, or what is considered to be as such. What is official is important, because as an encyclopaedia, we strive to be as accurate as possible. I find that the solution to use words like "road" and "street" to be frankly silly. When put into Google, looking for things that pertain only to "Saint Catherine Street" in Montreal produces 240 hits, versus 64.000 for "rue Ste-Catherine". I also lived on rue de l'Hôtel de Ville, not City Hall Street. I find the discussion of what Montrealers would say to be moot, as Montrealers would know what things are referred to in both languages. However, if a tourist or other uninformed person ever went to Montreal asking about "Pine Avenue", only those who lived in Montreal before the Charter would really know where to direct them. I myself lived in Montreal for two years and only learnt that the street was called Pine Avenue while on this discussion. Every anglophone or allophone Montrealer that I know refers to streets with their French name and drops the "rue" or "chemin", etc from the name, thus they refer to taking "Ste-Catherine" to St-Urbain. Even the journalism programme at Concorida requires its students to use French names for places when writing in English.

I also find the discussion of what is said in Paris or Vienna or any other city to be irrelevant. The only other city I could think of that is pertinent to this discussion is Hong Kong, which has a large bilingual population. In that case, places are left untranslated from the transliteration of Cantonese. Thus people live in Tsing Yi, not Black Clothes. My proposal would be to use the official name and then immediately include the translated name in English. For example, an article on Avenue des Pins would begin: "Avenue des Pins (English: Pine Avenue) is a ...". This option clearly states what the official name is while permitting for the fact that it is not the only name for the street, as another, unofficial and less and less frequently used, version of the street exists.

I also object to translating things into English that have never had an English-language equivilent. If people can understand Les Champs-Elysées, I'm not sure why having a French-named saint would be too far off. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 04:16, 6 December 2005 (UTC)