Talk:Greater Vancouver

Rename to "Metro Vancouver (metropolitan area)", then create redirect from "Greater Vancouver" to that new name
While "Greater Vancouver" used to be the common term used to describe the regional area of Vancouver and surrounding municipalities, the term "Metro Vancouver" is now much more common. For example, the City of Vancouver uses the term: Example 1 (bottom of page), Example 2 (page 6).

I propose that we rename this page "Metro Vancouver (metropolitan area)" and then create a redirect from "Greater Vancouver" to that new name.

To add a slight bit of confusion to the situation is the fact that Metro Vancouver is the name of the regional district that governs the Metro Vancouver metropolitan area. That is why the new name would have to have "(metropolitan area)" in it.

I'll go ahead with this in a bit unless others feel strongly otherwise.

Thanks Wikidsoup [talk]  21:54, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Strongly oppose "Greater Vancouver" still includes areas not in the GVRD; which is still legally the GVRD.  And there's a big difference between and RD and a region sharing the same name; e.g. the Cariboo and Cariboo Regional District, Fraser Valley and Fraser Valley Regional District; the Metro Vancouver board's attempt to rename itself has been supported and furthered by the media, but they are on the take, as the GVRD spends a lot of advertising money in their companies; BC Names (formerly BCGNIS) has repeatedly rejected attempts to rename the GVRD to the rebranded name; WP:COMMONNAME doesn't apply, or the neologism "Vancity" would then be a contender too.  There's good reason for the separation of regional district articles for geographic-region articles, I suggest you review past discussions about this; Wikipedia should not be used to further rebranding campaigns, nor should it be used to confuse the notion of region with regional district.Skookum1 (talk) 13:52, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Your third paragraph says it all, and points to the confusion you would engender. Lots of people, obviously including myself, still use the term "Greater Vancouver" when not referring specifically to the regional district as a boundaried area, or to its board; and internationally it would still be Greater Vancouver; and would include Abby and Mission in their eyes.  the name "Metro VAncouver" and the short form as in "people in Metro woke up today to heavy rain" both surfaced when Metro News appeared, also, and "Metro Toronto" was the inspiration.  "Greater VAncouver" is descriptive and historical and not confusing; other than how the media has convinced people like you it's the normal use; it's not; most people (other than reporters and newspaper copy editors'' do NOT use it....I don't have a poll for that...perhaps you do??
 * For statistical purposes, a google for "Greater Vancouver", has c. 5,950,000 hits, for "Metro Vancouver" has 2,180,000 hits. subracting "metro Vancouver" hits from the first google, that figure remains way higher, 6,280,000 hits, and includes many organizations using the "Greater Vancouver" name, from charities to companies and institutions......"metro vancouver" is a government/media creation and kinda "world-class city hype", clearly the term "Greater Vancouver" remains in greater use, and not just for references to the conurbation itself.....Skookum1 (talk) 14:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response Skookum. I agree that there is a big difference between a regional district and a region sharing the same name, and I hope/think that some of my recent edits to the Metro Vancouver article have helped with that distinction. WP:COMMONNAME states, 'Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources.' It seems that you and I differ on whether the term "Metro Vancouver" or "Greater Vancouver" is used more frequently to refer to the region. I think it is the former - both in *current* print (older publications would favour the latter term, which would partly explain "Greater Vancouver"'s greater Google juice) and in public discourse (no I do not know of a poll for this fact). I agree that "Metro Vancouver" probably started as a media hype phenomenon but I believe that hype worked and has made MV the dominantly used term these days. But, if we are to stick to that excerpt from WP:COMMONNAME, the fact that many "English-language reliable sources" pre-date the adoption of the use of the term "Metro Vancouver" could mean that we need to stick to the term "Greater Vancouver", regardless of whether "Metro Vancouver" is more commonly used. Wikidsoup [talk]  20:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The reason there's so many GV vs MV google results is not just history but because so many other groups than the GVRD body "Metro Vancouver" use the term "Greater Vancouver" in their names; as do, still, all of the GVRD's sub-bodies other than the board itself. And also subdividing services and things not in the Metro Van board's purview which are governed by other acts and legislation, e.g.  schools, hospitals etc. mean that region categories have to exist above RD categories for things that are not directly related to the RDs themselves, there are other ways of politically subdividing the province.  But for now you should read through this discussion and be mindful of its results; I'm not the only one who has this position.Skookum1 (talk) 02:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Greater Vancouver. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090724024843/http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=bb0fee45-b305-490a-b161-a21bcb1d7329&k=34160 to http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=bb0fee45-b305-490a-b161-a21bcb1d7329&k=34160

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:06, 23 October 2017 (UTC)