Talk:Quebec City–Windsor Corridor

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

GMA[edit]

Any reason the Montreal region is referred to as Montreal-Laval-Brossard ? Brossard isn't as big as other nearby cities part of the GMA such as Terrebonne or Repentigny, and certainly not as important as Longueuil. In any case, changed it to Greater Montreal Area, but am open to discussion if it's an accepted term by StatsCan. Yhave (talk) 20:19, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Other Names[edit]

My geography teacher has referred to this area as the Quebec-Windsor strip and the Quebec-Windsor Access. Is anyone else aware of these alternate names and if so should there be message about them at the top of the page? 72.143.166.161 20:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about the Quedor nickname?

Proximity to US Border[edit]

I have removed the following section of text from the Geography section: "The section of the corridor from Montreal to Hamilton (and again in Windsor) is close to or actually on the U.S. border." While perhaps not 100% false, it is certainly misleading, and far from accurate. The entire corridor is close to the U.S. border. To suggest that the Hamilton to Montreal portion is any closer is not only misleading, it's false. The fact that the entire corridor is in close proximity to the U.S. is covered in other portions of the text. See Redundancy. Baribeau 20:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dm64[edit]

This is my first stab at the page, but it needs a lot of work -- this is an article about where more than half of all Canadians live. It would be especially useful if someone could add a map and some pictures, as well as more information on climate, flora, and fauna. -- Dpm64 14:02, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)Yhave (talk) 20:19, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I like this article, and think it's necessary, but I question the name choice. To me, Quebec City-Windsor corridor refers specifically to the passenger rail service that runs between those two cities. However, this article talks more generally about the history, geography, and various methods of transportation that exists in this region, including passenger rail (though the article kind of glosses over that last topic). However, as far as I can tell, there is no "accepted" name for this megalopolis. Darkcore 08:36, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment. I do hear the name used in other contexts, but I agree that it is most closely associated with rail travel, just like the Northeast Corridor in the US is (though that term is used more broadly for geography as well now -- that article should probably be updated). Perhaps someone will be able to come up with a more generally acceptable name. Dpm64 15:01, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Wealthiest?[edit]

I always thought the Calgary-Edmonton corridor was wealthier than the Windsor-Quebec City corridor,per capita basis anyways.

The article doesn't specify "per capita" wealth. It's speaking strictly about concentration of wealth. Geoff NoNick 14:26, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I would imagine that concentration of wealth IS per capita wealth. Suggesting that a region is the wealthiest merely because it has the most people (and thus the most wealth) proves almost nothing; one could scale that up to declare the entirety of Canada the wealthiest region in Canada, if you understand what I'm trying to say. One could also declare many countries as a whole far wealthier than this corridor under those criterion as well even though their actual personal wealth levels are far lower. Perhaps it would be wiser to declare that the majority of Canada's GDP comes from this region (assuming such a fact is true) as the current setup is, in my opinion, misleading. I presume that the majority of Canada's GDP would likely come from this region, and if someone wants to check that, that would be a far better statistic to use - as it is, it's like saying that Germany is the wealthiest region in Europe, for example, which is just plain wrong. David Corbett 05:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
People usually do it by gross income, not per-capita; otherwise, the G7 would be Qatar, Luxembourg, Norway, Brunei, Singapore, the U.S., and Ireland. David (talk) 14:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BosWash?[edit]

"It has many similarities to the BosWash megalopolis that extends from Boston to Washington, D.C. in the United States." I'm thinking that's not the best analogy. This area has a fair ammount of cities in a relatively small area, but I don't think it would be considered a magalopolis. It isn't non-stop urban sprawl (at least not yet!) - there are still large areas of farmland and nature in this region. The stretch from Toronto to Windsor could maybe be considered pre-megalopolis (though it still includes a lot of farmland), but the remainer is far from it. The urban corridor of the US "upper midwest" is much more similar to this region - in terms of culture, population density, character, etc.

I think the analogy is meant to reflect that the Q-W Corridor's relative socio-economic impact on Canada is similar to the impact of the BosWash on the US. But whatever. Geoff NoNick 15:11, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with Jeff -- I've changed the analogy back (but used the Northwest Corridor, to make it clearer). David 03:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually not sure a relative comparison with the Northwest Corridor of the US is valid. The Quebec City-Windsor Corridor contains *half* of Canada's population, but the Northwest Corridor only contains 16% of the US population according to the BosWash article. There is an entire other strip of land on the other coast (Southern California) that has roughly the same population and economic importance as the Northwest Corridor, and even cultural influence what with Hollywood and all. And the Northwest corridor isn't the center of the US transportation infrastructure. Atlanta has the busiest airport.

Proposed merger[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


I believe the Corridor (VIA) article should be maintained since it pertains specifically to intercity passenger rail services in this geographic region. VIA uses the term Corridor as its marketing term for this service area which contains multiple trains over several routes. Plasma east (talk) 16:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree — this article is much longer than the other and has had many more contributions. It also refers to the geographical area in general, rather than just to VIA's service, so it has wider coverage. If there has to be a merge, it makes more sense to merge the small amount of extra info in the other article into a section of this one. David (talk) 19:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree — I didn't read carefully enough. I have no objection to maintaining Corridor (VIA) as a separate article for the reasons given above by Plasma east. David (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree — they are quite separate topics; there is no reason to consider merging them. Wilfred Day (talk) 01:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


Defining the corridor[edit]

I have long been aware of this corridor, having been born there, but this is my first look at the article, and my awareness of the corridor seems to differ from this article slightly.

First, why not include Trois-Rivieres/Shawinigan/Sherbrooke as part of the corridor? They're major cities that run along the path of the corridor as presently constituted.

Second, why not include Detroit? Personally, I've always viewed the corridor as extending from Chicago to Quebec City, as a parallel corridor to the BosWash corridor. In that sense you could make a case for including Buffalo, Toledo, maybe even Cleveland? (NorthernFalcon (talk) 02:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Trois-Rivieres is implicitly included in the corridor, since it's based on being along the shores of Lake Erie, Ontario and the Saint-Lawrence down to Quebec City. 3R is on the St.Lawrence. It also extends up the Ottawa River to Ottawa, and down the Rideau Canal/River to Kingston. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 03:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

Can anyone create a better image defining this area ? Not to insult the current image but it could be of better quality. PhilthyBear (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ontario - Quebec Corridor[edit]

The corridor has increasingly been named the "Ontario - Quebec Corridor " in the media. Perhaps a name change might be in order ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by UrbanNerd (talk • contribs) 22:48, 2 February 2011

Airport section[edit]

CFB Petawawa is not an airbase by any stretch of the imagination. It has a helipad and a Hercules landing field which is less busy than most general aviation aerodromes in the valley. If we include Petawawa in the "airports" section, then by that logic 50+ aerodromes along the corridor should be included. The purpose of the section is to list the major aviation centres, not the minor ones. UpstreamPaddler (talk) 04:43, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Updating the population statistics.[edit]

In the next few days, I will attempt to update the population figures by using the 2011 Canadian census. On the Ontario side, there are 47 counties within the corridor with a total 2011 population of 11,631,799 and on the Quebec side there are 9 regions and 3 metropolitan areas that make up 6,790,431. Thus, this corridor had a population of 18,422,230 in 2011.Lightspeed2012 20:16, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Quebec City–Windsor Corridor. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:56, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup tags[edit]

@S-Ranger: It appears that you recently added more than 20 cleanup tags to this article, but I still don't notice any "unsourced predictions" in this article. Can you explain the reason for these tags? Jarble (talk) 18:34, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Every place I left a tag, statements are made as though they are facts, with no cited sources at all. Statistics Canada released a document in 2001 as part of the census of that year, that the London (Ontario) Chamber of Commerce 'leaked' online, with the StatsCan logo all over it. It stated this: 

Windsor-Quebec City Corridor, 2001

Ontario Section
10,706,513 93% of Ontario's population

Quebec Section
 6,327,354 87% of Quebec's population

Total Population
17,033,867 57% of Canada's population

The text was embedded on a graphical map of the corridor, with various types of StatsCan city-regions dotted and named on the map. I asked StatsCan how it defined the W-QCC and it claimed that it didn't measure it at all. So, I attached their ('leaked') document to an email reply, and ended up with the Director of Communications for Statistics Canada getting back to me to try to do damage control, claiming that it was a one-off thing that had only been done for the London Chamber of Commerce. (Seems quite unfair to Canadian taxpayers, and a lie, but.)

I asked him how Stats Canada came up with the numbers, what it defined the W-QCC as, so that anyone could calculate the above for any census year. He told me that the city-region names on the map of the document were how it was calculated... but city-regions are defined in more than one way by StatsCan so I asked him which way the city-regions were defined. He told me it was by CMA (Census Metropolitan Area) but many of the city labels on the map were not CMAs, such as London, Ontario. He corrected himself yet again, claiming that CA (Census Agglomeration) definitions were used for places like London, and for places like Toronto and Montreal, the CMA data was used.

So, I used the 2001 census data at the time, to calculate it all. When I had Excel add up the populations of every city-region area on the StatsCan map, as they had told me it was done, nothing added up. So, I got back to the Director of Communications for Statistics Canada yet again, to see what lie he'd tell me about the W-QCC next. My hard drive then decided to crash on me.

I couldn't recover any email, I had no idea who I'd been talking to (specific email addresses) at StatsCan after I got my computer fixed, and here we are. I still see no verifiable sources of even what the name of the Windsor-Quebec City Corridor is. We would need a source like Statistics Canada to state the population, land area and even what is and isn't part of the Windsor-Quebec City Corridor. I see no such documentation, anywhere online.

As for economic data, it'd be wonderful if Stats Canada were as open about it as the US Department of Commerce is, where it's a simple matter to get NAICS and other industry data to mix and match for any combination of states/industries, and even for economic regions like the Great Lakes region... but Canada doesn't do this. No one has any idea what the economy of the W-QCC is, because no one can even define what its name is, with an official map or anything else official, other than official lies about what Stats Canada does and doesn't produce and give to departments of commerce, with our tax money, behind our backs. And only the London Chamber of Commerce, not the Toronto Board of Trade or Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal. Why would StatsCan bother to give Toronto and Montreal information about the W-QCC? Only the London Chamber of Commerce, the one that happened to accidentally leak a StatsCan document about the Windsor-Quebec City Corridor, ever got any info about the W-QCC as a one-off thing... and StatsCan even denied that much. And I can't find that document anymore, so it must have never existed in the first place, so I can't even prove that Statistics Canada calls it the Windsor-Quebec City Corridor (in English) not the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor.

Please feel free, anyone, to replace each of my tags with the type of verifiable information required on Wikipedia. I would be delighted to see any type of verifiable, credible documentation of what the W-QCC is, starting with its official English name. —S-Ranger (talk) 18:45, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What a load of junk. Seriously. Firstly, you need to read WP:CALC. Secondly, we have the word of an anonymous user that they, over a decade and a half ago, made some phone calls and because of that the entire article should be defaced or deleted? C'mon, you expect us to work from that? Nonsense. oknazevad (talk) 21:35, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Quebec_City–Windsor_Corridor&oldid=1209926086"