Talk:Greater Toronto Area

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Greater Toronto Area. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Greater Toronto Area at the Reference desk.

Urban studies and planning Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Ontario / Toronto / Geography High‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[List of country calling codes#At a glance|1]] The anchor (#At a glance) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Why is the Durham Region included?[edit]

Doesn't Oshawa have its own CSA (even though I think its stupid, it the truth) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.33.22 (talk) 14:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this article is called Greater Toronto Area, not Toronto CMA. Toronto CMA excludes Oshawa, which has its own CMA. The Greater Toronto Area is mainly used by urban geographers and urban planners, while statisticians and politicians use the Toronto CMA. Note that this article falls under the Urban studies and planning WikiProject. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 15:27, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Landsat Image[edit]

The landsat image is certianly not from 2004. More likely taken around 1985, based on land development. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.152.161 (talk) 14:31, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Greater Toronto Area. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:05, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Greater Toronto Area. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 19:16, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Greater Toronto Area. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 14:35, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Greater Toronto Area. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 06:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This statement is misleading[edit]

"Implementation of a 'Presto card' by Metrolinx has created a common means for all fare payments and allow for seamless connection between these and other transit operators.[83]"

is more akin to "Implementation of a 'Credit card' by Stores has created a common means for payments and allow for seamless purchases throughout the world.

problem is the only commonality between transit systems is to make payments off of card balance and provide proof of fare. equipment is coded separately for each separate transit operator (only balance is common)

any intra transit system passes (like the weekly gta pass - allows unlimited access to 6 seperate transit systems) currently exists outside of the metrolinx ecosystem)

major pov issues with submissions originating from metrolinx.

id suggest something closer to "implementation of the presto card from metrolinx provides a common fare payment method between many of ontarios seperate public transit operators. proof of fare and integrated same system transfers are also provided through the presto card." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:3C60:10AA:F8F9:3E52:BDC1:DBA0 (talk) 06:35, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Leventio: @Vaselineeeeeeee: What do you think? Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 13:15, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd agree with him, it is rather POV-y. I think his proposed change is reasonable. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 13:21, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Upon closer inspection, it needs to change. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 02:04, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm okay with the suggested change. Leventio (talk) 15:55, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto GTA vs CMA[edit]

I reverted a couple of changes from 4-Jan-18 because the editor seemed to be conflating the GTA (which is a designation mainly used provincially in Ontario by planners & civil servants, as I understand it) with the "Toronto CMA" (which is a Census Metropolitan Area defined by Stats Canada).

Found this on a page on the Ontario government's site, https://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/economy/demographics/census/cenhi1.html: "The GTA is an administrative area of the province while the Toronto CMA is defined by Statistics Canada. The GTA consists of the Census Divisions of Toronto, Peel, York, Durham and Halton. The Toronto CMA includes all of Toronto, Peel and York Census Divisions but only parts of Durham and Halton."

So while the two designations overlap substantially, they are different.

Some links in the section entitled "Census Metropolitan Area" may need to be fixed however, as they are broken and/or out of date - help is appreciated. Mojo87 (talk) 04:17, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The GTA" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect The GTA. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 27#The GTA until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. feminist (+) 10:52, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GTA vs Toronto CMA[edit]

So an editor has recently incorrectly equated the GTA with the Toronto CMA. It's quite clear that the Toronto CMA is not the "official name" of the GTA and these two things should not be equated. The article itself is already quite clear on this. If it is desired to create an article on the Toronto CMA then that's clearly fine, but trying to rejig the GTA article to pretend it's officially the CMA is not the right approach. Canterbury Tail talk 18:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No one is equating the Toronto GTA and the Toronto CMA, but you may be trying to do too much on one page and confusing the casual reader. If you want to have a separate section on the various definitions, that would be acceptable. The infobox clearly includes a field for "official name," since the GTA is not an officially designated place by StatCan, we just won't have an official name there. We probably should not have a separate page for Toronto CMA, too confusing.

If you want, I can replace the mid-2000s map with my interactive map but just tell me which jurisdictions you want included. StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with the map we have? And as for which jurisdictions, the article covers those. It should cover whatever the reliable sources say are in the GTA. Canterbury Tail talk 18:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I was at a meeting. There's too much to sort out here, which is why I am reconsidering my initial opposition to a second CMA page. The CMA is not represented very well in Wikipedia--when one goes to the CMA header on this page where a map or list of the CMA municipalities should be, there's a link to just a relisting of the municipalities in the GTA planning area and featuring the same 2006 map.

Also, this page here regularly cites the StatCan statistics (for population, etc...) which makes the casual reader assume StatCan officially recognizes the GTA as the CMA. One example is the table to the right of the Demographics of Toronto heading that misleads the reader into thinking StatCan defines the Toronto area as the five regions. Your region populations are probably accurate, but the context is misleading. I highly recommend re-citing your populations and other stats to the GTA planning board and not StatCan.

I propose for the List of municipalities in the Greater Toronto Area page, that it be repurposed into the CMA page. We can post my interactive map there and list out the jurisdictions in the CMA using the 2021 census data, set up a disambiguation header and this page can solely be for the GTA.

So what's wrong with your mid-2000s map, nothing really, except having the GTA map front and center assumes a bias from the CMA in favor of the GTA. To avoid such bias, here's the map we really should use: https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/90c1-EDC-Map-GTA-CMA.png. It shows both the GTA and CMA pretty clearly and is from an official source. If you are fine with a static (not interactive map), I would probably filter that map through a graphic design program, add some color, and replace the 2006 map. StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 19:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]