Talk:Roncesvalles, Toronto

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

Naming[edit]

Italic textAre we treating "Roncesvalles Village" as having started with the arrival of the Poles, or should it not go back to discuss earlier inhabitants of the community pre-1940? Kind of a strange implication, that the community became gentrified after being a Polish community... :) --Krupo 17:27, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any historical information on the neighbourhood, but if you do, you're welcome to add it to the article. Though, the article should explain that "Roncesvalles Village" did not really exist until the BIA was created. As for the Polish-gentrification bit, it's not a causality thing; gentrification undoubtedly occurred here because of its relative proximity to downtown/accessibility to public transport and the relative low cost of housing stock in the area. Darkcore 23:16, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, makes sense - yeah, the area was really split between Parkdale and High Park until the BIA, and the custom street signs, came along. Seems like a creation of the past 15-25 years (when the street signs that actually call the area that appeared). I wonder how much effect the closure of the whorehouse/crackhouse that used to be the Edgewater had? ;) Once again, is it cause, or effect? :) Krupo 01:24, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speaking of the BIA, phenomenon, I looked up Swansea, and then ended up writing this... not included in article yet b/c I'm not sure of relevance... ideas?: "Ironically, Swansea is sometimes incorrectly called Bloor_West_Village, after the articially-named area of that name."
I don't quite get what you mean by "artificially-named area." Darkcore 05:26, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I quickly realized that was a bad way of phrasing it. I was trying to make a distinction between an area named after an actual village which was later annexed by the city, contrasting with an area which gave itself a 'village' name after the fact. Does that make more sense? Krupo 17:35, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

Well, first, I don't see how it really matters (of course, you can talk about how/why it was named that, but I don't really see why any "contrast" is necessary) and second, lots of Toronto neighbourhoods were not named after "villages", including Church and Wellesley (even if it is a "village"), Korea Town, The Danforth, The Kingsway, etc. Darkcore 15:49, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • It's not a big deal at all, with one exception: people trying to learn about the history of the area, trying to learn about "Roncesvalles Village." While gay village or Korea Town can be identified as new things (more acceptance for gays, new immigration), the Roncesvalles Village tag isn't as obvious. Krupo 22:09, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

The current description does a good enough job of explaining the background behind the name. Darkcore 04:49, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Yeah, it's cool. :) Krupo 07:18, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)

Roncesvalles History[edit]

I used to live on Roncesvalles in the mid 80's. I too remember the old Edgewater hotel. Cleaned up around the time they "cleaned out" the homeless peoples 'cave' at the bottom of the street near the Katyn monument. This was to make then President Ronald Regan's trip from Pearson airport more 'senic'as he came in for a G7 meeting downtown. At the same time the economics of the city were changing for the arts community. As prices rose along Queen west, artists had to move further west. Many came to Roncesvalles, and also got studios along Sauraren ave. The Edgewater hosted local and hardcore bands for a while and alternated with C&W. I'm sure current residents are happy with what's happened to real estate values lately, but I'm sure the artists who helped make the area interesting have had to move on.

Here's a linkto a site by a guy named Rick Bébout who goes over some recent area history with photos.

Doug


Ronces[edit]

As a 20 year resident of the Roncesvalles Village area I can attest to the fact that the short form "Ronces" refers to the street rather than the area. That is, someone may live "on Ronces" or "just off Ronces" but not "in Ronces."

The term Roncesvalles Village refers to the BIA, which also refers only to the commercial properties on Roncesvalles Avenue. Further, this term was thrust upon the residents of the neighbourhood and is, as a previous contributor has noted, somewhat of a artificial de jure name for the area. The adoption of this name was poorly received by some residents (myself included) because of the similarity to nearby Bloor West Village, and the appearance of wannabee-ism.

The neighbourhood which extends to the east of Roncesvalles is technically Parkdale, and the neghbourhood to the west is technically High Park. However, some people refer to the area between Parkside and Sorauren and Howard Park and Marion as "howmapaso," no doubt inspired by NYC's TriBeCa, etc.

Ask some residents.

--Happy wanderer 16:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that "Ronces" is never used to describe the neighbourhood, just the street. However, I grew up in this area and I have never heard the name "howmapaso" used to describe the neighbourhood. That name is beyond silly. Darkcore 18:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

more exact borders?[edit]

Can we give it more exact borders? for example is 43 wright avenue in roncesvalles village?--Sonjaaa 23:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I don't agree with High Park being lumped into "Roncesvalles." While the area does border on Roncesvalles, the city of Toronto's official neighbourhood designation sees the area split into "High Park-Swansea," and "Roncesvalles," depending which side of Roncesvalles you're on.
High Park-Swansea
http://www.toronto.ca/demographics/cns_profiles/cns87.htm
Roncesvalles
http://www.toronto.ca/demographics/cns_profiles/cns86.htm
Since "Swansea" is officially defined by city (the part of the neighbourhood west of the park) that leaves the remainder as "High Park." While the "High :Park" subway station is not in this area, it is in a separately defined neighbourhood listed as "High Park North"
High Park North.
http://www.toronto.ca/demographics/cns_profiles/cns88.htm
To the residents, the area west of Roncesvalles is "High Park," as indicated by local plaques reading "High Park 1911, 1912, 1913 etc." It just doesn't :help though, when realtors are so inconsistent in identifying the area.
Actually... most of this info is found here: under "surrounding neighbourhoods"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Park


I'd also like to add, that this is not just a minor labelling concern. I have found, in media distributed by a couple local realtors, depictions of the area as shown in this article's map. While I do not know whether this was taken from wikipedia, or vice versa, I know that the lack of clarity in defining these areas is not helpful. This can have serious ramifications when architects/planners/lawyers argue before either the Committee of Adjustment or the Ontario Municipal Board; they may use such information to misconstrue a "neighbourhood" in order to claim that a proposed structure is in keeping with its character. CrossAr (talk) 16:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I too have serious problems with this article, and the attached map is incorrect. The boudaries of "Roncesvalles", according to the City of Toronto map are: Roncesvalles Ave, Queen St. W., Bloor St West, and the CPR tracks. I'm placing the {{Disputed|date=December 2011}} template in the article.--Abebenjoe (talk) 00:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--

Pronunciation of Roncesvalles[edit]

I have always wondered how Roncesvalles 'should' be pronounced and how it is actually pronounced. A I had always assumed it to be French, I was expecting Ron-se-val but heard when I visited the area in the 70s and 80s Ron-cus-vales. Is this roughly the pronunciation today and is it how it would be pronounced in Spanish? --User:Brenont 02:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hard to say. Apparently it is ron-thes-VAL-yes in the dialect local to the Spanish Roncesvalles. In Toronto it is RON-ses-vails or RON-sees for short. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happy wanderer (talk • contribs) 00:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

add info to Roncesvalles link[edit]

the articles "Roncesvalles" which the link points to has nothing about the battle of 1813. Perhaps someone (more comfortable than I am at using the codes etc) could add that there. 128.100.110.87 (talk) 00:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The wording might not be the most elegant, but it's there. Franamax (talk) 04:14, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

we all no ronsecvalles is a beutiful and wonderful place to visti with historical and intelectual region. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.197.87 (talk) 19:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page move and restore[edit]

I notice that this page was moved to Roncesvalles Village, then subsequently a copy/paste restore was performed. This split the article's edit history, which may cause GFDL compliance problems. I've fixed it by deleting the restored version of the page, and all subsequent edits, moved the original page back here, then restored the deleted edits. There is now a minor inconsistency, though, as can be seen in this edit, which contains part of an edit by JosephIWMolto, and part by Alaney2k, and further includes a self-redirect. The subsequent edit resolves this problem.

Please do not fix a page move with a copy/paste. Mindmatrix 22:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

Switching the History Section to follow the modern Character and Culture sections seems inconsistent with the template used on Toronto articles. Of the articles on Toronto's neighbourhoods that have History and Culture/Character/Community sections the following order is used at the moment:

  • Rosedale - History, Character
  • Alexandra Park - History, Culture
  • The Annex - History, Character
  • Harbourfront - History, Character
  • Kensington Market - History, Culture
  • Toronto Islands - History, The Islands Today
  • Swansea - History, Character
  • Lawrence Park - History, Community

And the City of Toronto article itself places culture, character etc behind history, only the article for High Park North reverses the order.JosephIWMolto (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The history section is too big. This is only a neighbourhood. Alaney2k (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's an opinion about the section itself not an issue with the template (where it should be placed). As for length, there are a number of Toronto neighbourhoods with similar sized articles. The template that the Toronto Project suggest is based on the London Template; almost all London boroughs (most of them are Victorian, not older) have similar length articles, many are much longer. It covers the history of the neighbourhood I think concisely and logically mentioning only those factors that led to the creation, development and naming of this neighbourhood. Of course history is not everyone's 'cup of tea' but it will always be central to an encyclopaedia article (If I type in 'Roncesvalles' I would likely like to know when and why it was created, by whom and how it got its name and took the shape it has; demographically/physically and any major changes to the area, not just a description of what it is like now although this is part of it too, it can be very subjective and is really more of a tourism page). At least that is what I thought.JosephIWMolto (talk) 12:47, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problems with having a history section. However, the neighbourhood history is nothing out of the ordinary. There were some land-owners, they sub-divided, laid out streets, it changed from rural to market garden to urban. So we need to keep that in mind. What the history gives is only an explanation of how it was laid out and developed, not like there was historical events happening here. Today, it's basically a middle-class neighbourhood with some development issues, some poverty, some local concerns. There's a large Polish contingent, that makes it unique in a way, it has street cars and the local commerce is local small business. That's what the neighbourhood is about. Not that O'Hara was given the land for helping in the 1837 rebellion. Alaney2k (talk) 17:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

pronuncition again[edit]

The discussion of pronunciation above was ambiguous. Is the first ess pronounced /s/, and the second /z/, as we currently have it? kwami (talk) 10:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

polish neighbourhood[edit]

"Culturally, the area is known as the centre of the Polish community in Toronto, with prominent Polish institutions, businesses and St Casimir's Catholic Church located on Roncesvalles Avenue. "

Maybe ten years ago, but the majority of the Polish people have moved out, along with their businesses. The majority of stores are Starbucks or independent coffee/furniture stores/video stores, etc, and if you actually walk up Ronces from Queen all the way to Howard you'll find that there are very few Polish businesses around. I teach in a nearby school and I don't think I've had a Polish kid in my class. 69.165.134.67 (talk) 07:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the demographics, the majority of the population in the neighbourhood has never been Polish, so that hasn't changed. There are still more Polish businesses along Ronces than anywhere else in the city. There is the Polish Credit Union, the polish book collection at the library, the polish festival. Still very polish. I guess you don't live in the area. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 13:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Factual accuracy disputed[edit]

I put the factual accuracy disputed tag on this article because the boundary map is incorrect. The boundaries of "Roncesvalles", according to theCity of Toronto map are: Roncesvalles Ave, Queen St. W., Bloor St West, and the CPR tracks. That is not what the article's map or text indicate and is misleading (not necessarily intentionally, but definitely incorrect).--Abebenjoe (talk) 00:20, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not about the official neighbourhood of the City of Toronto. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 15:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Roncesvalles, Toronto. 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) 17:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Roncesvalles,_Toronto&oldid=1205104335"