Jump to content

Talk:North Dundas, Ontario

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 10 November 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. There is no consensus on whether a township with a population of roughly 10,000 is large enough to be classed as a city per WP:CANPLACE, and therefore exempt from the uniqueness requirement. This closure takes no position on whether North Dundas should be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT or not. (non-admin closure) IffyChat -- 16:02, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


North Dundas, OntarioNorth Dundas – There is no evidence that North Dundas, Tasmania is/was an actual place. Dundas, Tasmania is a place, and mines and roads are in or go to the northern portion of it (i.e. North Dundas Road). In addition, per WP:DABMENTION, the blue link at North Dundas should cover the topic that doesn't have an article (which the tram article doesn't, it just mentions North Dundas Road as a crossing). WP:ONEOTHER also would apply here. - Floydian τ ¢ 16:08, 10 November 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose some basic research showed that there is evidence that North Dundas was a place. https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1530994 etc etc The Acts of the Parliament of Tasmania - Volume 24, Part 1 1917 "Vicinity of North Dundas" In ictu oculi (talk) 20:02, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Those are passing mentions at best and not really evidence that it was a defined place at all. Regardless, there's still no article on the topic to warrant a disambiguation page. - Floydian τ ¢ 20:47, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Canada-related articles, Canadian towns should have the province in their title unless they are unique. I had previously found Acts of the Parliament of Tasmania - 1897 which seems to refer North Dundas as a distinct place - it authorized building a railway from "the Town of Zeehan to North Dundas and Mount Read". There is this which lists it as a "locality" and this is a 1903 stock certificate for the Cornwall Tin Mining Company in North Dundas. The tin field of North Dundas is listed as a 1909 book. Finally, this book says that North Dundas is 7-8 miles from Zeehan on the North Dundas Road. This place certainly existing for a time during a mineral boom. There is no requirement that the other places have an article to require the province be included in the name, or to be listed on a dab page. Granted, the coverage of North Dundas in the tram article is minor and it would certainly be better to expand it. MB 02:50, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That MOS page also says "or are unquestionably the most significant place". An existing place is certainly a primary topic over a possible former place that has no article. A hatnote to the tram more than suffices per WP:ONEOTHER. Regardless, the first link is passing mention (they were weird with capital letters at the turn of the century as well), the second is WP:UGC, the third I'm not going to touch (WP:OR), the tin field book doesn't indicated it was a place, the last book also similarly says East Dundas on another page, yet only has a section on the settlement of Dundas (the actual place). You would be hard pressed to pass WP:GNG with these, if there were to actually be an article on this supposed place. - Floydian τ ¢ 04:25, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You are misreading the naming conventions for Canada place. "or are unquestionably the most significant place" applies to cities. Small subdivisions (towns, villages, etc.) contain the province unless unique - no other place by that name anywhere in the world. MB 06:23, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    North Dundas in Ontario is the same level of government as a city. It is also currently unique, and a couple of gazetteers from the 1910s don't prove otherwise. Here's also a c. 1910 map by the Tasmania Survey Office, showing there was only "Dundas", not North Dundas, South Dundas, East Dundas nor West Dundas. - Floydian τ ¢ 14:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. At 11,000 residents, and two dozen notable bluelinked residents, North Dundas is not exactly a small place, and can be considered "unique" for most intents and purposes. The supposed namesake is too far-fetched to be considered "existing", has no article, and can be gracefully covered by a hatnote. No such user (talk) 14:15, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: for clearer consensus. – robertsky (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: Primary topic argument appeared. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.