Talk:List of neighbourhoods in Edmonton

message: Like the Edmonton Capital Region page, this page listing Edmonton's neighbourhoods has also been long-awaited. Right now, it's not totally perfect and there's probably some things I haven't added but should, and I've deliberately left out industrial parks so this lists only residential neighbourhoods. But feel free to edit this page as long as it's relevant enough. NorthernFire 00:40, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: If we know how a neighbourhood got it's name, should be link to the person or place it is named after?  For example Wilfrid Laurier for Laurier Heights, or Derry, Northern Ireland for Londonderry?  Kevlar67 08:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins 

message: I like both of the above suggestions but perhaps a further step should be undertaken.  Specifically, minor areas should be grouped under major neighbourhoods as has been done thus fas with Millwoods and Castledowns.  I also suggest using the pattern I started with Castledowns and The Pallisades where the minor neighbourhoods are listed by date of establishment not alphabetical order. --SinisterLemon 01:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organization: Major Neighbourhoods and Date of Establishment 

message: I've separated the neighborhoods which, based on information I had available, would have been part of the Town of Jasper Place prior to annexation by the City of Edmonton into their own category.  This is similar to the treatment of Mill Woods neighborhoods, which are in their own category separate from other south east Edmonton neighborhoods.
66.48.175.211 04:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jasper Place 

message: I've added some text to generally describe the larger parts of the city, "northeast Edmonton", "southeast Edmonto", et al.  I've used generally straight forward boundaries like Gateway Boulevard.  I've place the north boundary of West Edmonton along 111 Avenue, largely so we aren't splitting residential Jasper Place across north west Edmonton and West Edmonton.  In doing so, I've had to move a couple of neighborhoods from one area of town to another area of town.
199.213.199.33 18:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Descriptions Of The Larger Areas 

message: Someone added a section on tent cities and the housing boomb of the early 21st century.  I moved it to a spot closer to the end of the article as it doesn,t (IMHO) fit as a higher organization level item interrupting the lower organization level lists of neighbourhoods in different parts of the city.  I also did a bit of rewriting to improve the flow.
I love what this person has added.
That said, there have been other times during Edmonton's historical development where a significant proportions of the city's population was housed in tent cities.  This was particularly true during the early 1900s.  It's an important theme in the history of Edmonton as the city has adapted to growth and change.
So I think it would be a good idea for someone to take this material, expand it to cover a history of tent cities in Edmonton, and move it into its own article.
Johntwrl 03:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tent Cities 

message: This article is not very useful without maps showing the location of these neighbourhoods. Any chance of that happening?
Miken32 17:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Maps

message: Dickinsfield is not an official neighbourhood of Edmonton, whereas Evansdale and Northmount are. Is there any reference that verifies Dickinsfield is the sum of Evansdale and Northmount? If so, then Dickinsfield may be a larger community consisting of two or more official neighbourhoods (like Millbourne is to Lee Ridge, Michaels Park, Richfield and Tweddle Place). If it is more than Evansdale and Northmount, what other neighbourhoods are included?As Evansdale and Northmount are separate neighbourhoods, they warrant their own articles like all other Edmonton neighbourhoods, and they should be split off from Dickinsfield, Edmonton (as Evansdale, Edmonton and Northmount, Edmonton). I will post an invite at Talk:Dickinsfield, Edmonton to invite watchers of that article to provide comments here. Hwy43 (talk) 04:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: . In the absence of any comments, Evansdale, Edmonton and Northmount, Edmonton have been created and Dickinsfield, Edmonton has been retained as a higher level community article. Hwy43 (talk) 05:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dickinsfield 

message: A relative of mine who's a longtime Edmonton resident said at one time there were neighbourhoods in the valley flats of the North Saskatchewan River that were expropriated and torn down due to repeated river flooding. 1.) If this is true, what were their names? 2.) Could there be a section entitled "Former neighbourhoods" to list them? Thanks. – Jwkozak91 (talk) 00:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: One former neighbourhood within the river valley that no longer exists is Walterdale, Edmonton. I believe this was the most prominent one of those that no longer exist. Just started the article, with history presently to 1915. The references found thus far are silent on what became of the neighbourhood after the 1915 flood. Not sure when the expropriation occured yet, but should be uncoverable with a little more research.As for others, I believe there were some small-scale ones. My 1958 map of Edmonton sheds some clues on possible locations, but is silent on whether the subdivisions were ever actually developed and is also silent on names. If we can find reliable sources confirming more, other than Walterdale, perhaps a "Former neighbourhoods" section is warranted. In the meantime, I'll embed Walterdate under the "Old Strathcona and area" section as it was the first to develop in what became Strathcona, Alberta, but will qualify that it is a former neighbourhood. Hwy43 (talk) 07:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former river flat neighbourhoods? 

message: This article appears to have broken the city into large arbitrary geographic sectors (west, southwest, etc.) based on original research from its beginning, being carried forward to the present (with some fluctuation), rather than being based on reliable sources. I recently found a reliable source (see page 12 of 31 specifically) that breaks the city into seven geographic sectors: northwest, north, northeast, west, southwest, southeast and mature area (includes downtown and inner city).
If there are no objections, I intend to revamp this article to reflect this geographic sector breakdown, which would be an improvement over its present unreferenced, OR-based breakdown. I'll likely do so in a manner similar to the table I recently added to List of neighbourhoods in Calgary with some demographic information, while further reflecting larger residential areas (i.e. Mill Woods) and maybe communities (i.e. Lakewood) where applicable. Once done, I will update the related Template:Edmonton neighbourhoods and so on. Hwy43 (talk) 05:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What directions are, isn't bad original research. You can't argue that Allard isn't on the south side. The problem is, is how many directions to use, and where the line is drawn. It is great that the City uses a three tier hierarchy, because we can use it here, so I say go ahead and use theirs. The only problem I see is that the mature area looks big, and that the eight sectors aren't close to equal. 117Avenue (talk) 23:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll proceed within some interim changes, and will return again to prepare a table once the 2012 municipal census data by neighbourhood is available as open data. The mature area is big. It can be divided further based on those divisions presently based on reliable sources, and we'll see what is left over. I see the present breakdown of six sectors isn't equal either, but I'm not concerned about equal areas. Throw in the industrial neighbourhoods and most balance out anyway. Hwy43 (talk) 05:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: A table has been added and all existing content has been  for now. I'll return in a couple days to review this former content for potential return to the article in some form. Hwy43 (talk) 01:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geographic sector breakdown 

message: I've got to agree with , I think the rank column implies some sort of official rank. This is why we have sortable tables, so that readers can sort the table in a way they would like. 117Avenue (talk) 20:11, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Canada's leading statistical agency includes population rank columns. Here, it allows us to quickly determine where each neighbourhood ranks in population compared with the most and least populated neighbourhoods. Otherwise, to do the rank comparison of a certain neighbourhood, readers have to sort by population and then count rows manually, which is exhaustive and prone to human error particularly on long lists. The column is therefore quite useful. If its sortability is redundant with the sortability of the 2012 population column, I'd suggest just making the rank column unsortable. Hwy43 (talk) 20:23, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In order to compare a certain neighbourhood, readers just have to sort by the population, no counting needed. And what about area or density? 117Avenue (talk) 23:39, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Allow me to clarify my intent in the above. It allows one to compare the size of a neighbourhood among all neighbourhoods. Sure sorting the population column confirms Crestwood is smaller than Chambery, but it doesn't tell us Crestwood is the 178th largest by population among Edmonton's 375 neighbourhoods. Ranking geographic communities by area or density is less common than ranking by population. StatCan doesn't publish numbered ranks by area or density. Hwy43 (talk) 03:51, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Since, by no control of the community (like a village or town), neighbourhoods range in size I think density is a better identifier of the type of neighbourhood, than the latest population numbers. 117Avenue (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: While I don't disagree that density would be the best true measure, neither it nor area are as widespread and common as ranking by population. Hwy43 (talk) 05:54, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: While it is useful in that it avoids the reader from having to 'count the rows', I think having the rank column first gives it too much weight and still comes across as a primary field of interest over the actual population numbers, and still can appear as an "official ranking". As there is a precedence for it under StatCan, I say keep the column, but move it either next to population or the end of the rows (again similar to StatCan examples). The title of the column should more clearly state "2012 Population Rank" rather than "Rank" and population as a subtitle. Same argument for the same elements in the List of neighbourhoods in Calgary page. Murdocke (talk) 11:28, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Yes, ties should be indicated. If the rank is intended to be read when the table is otherwise sorted, the reader should know that that entry shares the rank. 117Avenue (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thought that immediately after saving the page removing the last seven instances. I've reverted my edits and replaced the equal signs with asterisks and an associated note. Hwy43 (talk) 05:54, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rank 

message: Before I filled out my Edmonton census I read through the FAQ page. There it says "areas of the City with a population between 1 and 49 are always reported as zero." So I figured this page would need a note like summer villages on List of municipalities in Alberta. But the 2012 data here lists five neighbourhoods with a population between 1 and 49. Is the area they are referring to on the FAQ smaller than a neighbourhood, or does this only apply to residential neighbourhoods? Is this also a concern on the Calgary list? 117Avenue (talk) 06:08, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It applies to neighbourhoods and despite the City saying that, five neighbourhoods slipped through the cracks last census. Sloppy. A note like you said would be appropriate. However a second note would also be needed for these five along the lines of "Notwithstanding the other note, the City did publish the populations of A, B, C, D and E despite having populations less than 50."Calgary handles these differently. IIRC, instead of suppressing the numbers, the City assigns them to residual areas where the geographic locations of these populations are unknown. Hwy43 (talk) 13:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymity? 

message: I have never heard of this geographic breakdown. I have never heard of the city's central area referred to as the "Mature sector" or the Henday as being in the "Transportation and Utility Corridor". I looked at the 2015 source map (p43) and the 2017 updated map, and if you read the preceding and following pages for context, subsectors are not based on geography, but sectors are based on economic/residential growth. When I google "Edmonton Mature sector", I see this terminology is used by nobody outside of city planning or copy/paste of this wikipedia article.  In regard to being "official", I'm pretty sure we don't have a Office of Neighborhood Services like they do for Boston neighborhoods, so these city planning "subsectors" are no more "official" than AHS's "Edmonton subregions". While using city planning subsectors has the advantage of not needing updates (as the city growth radiates outwards, so the subsectors remain constant), I think there are more useful and relevant ways of organizing neighbourhoods that are just as "official". Here are a few that I think are more relevant:
* geographical: Not by city growth (with "Mature" sector), but actually geographical. We can hypothetically split Edmonton neighbourhoods into Downtown core, and some cardinal directions. I don't think geographical actually makes sense for Edmonton, nor is it "official" in any capacity, but I put it here for completeness. Organized by geography is how it's done in neighbourhoods in Old Toronto. 
* political: Edmonton is currently divided into 12 wards which you can find a map in Edmonton's City Sector Profiles. I think this is the simplest and most official way of dividing up Edmonton neighbourhoods. Downside is that wards change frequently every couple years. Organized by political boundaries is how it is done in List of neighbourhoods in Montreal.
* educational: Edmonton has 9 public school wards which you can find at the city's Public School District Ward Maps This is probably less useful than above. Similarly, there are 7 Edmonton catholic wards.
* real estate: I honestly think the way it was organized before was based on real estate. This would probably make sense to most ordinary people. Sorted by something from the real estates industry is how it is done in neighbourhoods in Victoria.
** pre-"Geographic sector breakdown":  I still see maps using this old organization used in real estate websites.
*** Northwest
*** Northeast
*** Central
*** South Central
*** West
*** Southwest
*** Southeast
** realtors/MLS Listings: The Edmonton MLS system seems to break it down to 40~50 zones in a numbering probably in order of city historical growth. This map colors them into larger groups. ArTEAM Realty has a Zone Map page provides downloads of detailed zone maps from REALTORS ® Association of Edmonton (2015). The way it is colored doesn't seem to have an official description, but seems to be colored similar to above areas except a northeast/southeast boundary is moved down, South Central area is removed entirely, and new area (Zone 29/30) for Millwoods and east neighbourhoods. 
** REALTORS® Association of Edmonton : The above areas is sort of (not exactly) reflected in the REALTORS® Association of Edmonton latest media release (p13), where they list the following areas:
*** Northwest
*** North Central
*** Northeast
*** Central
*** West
*** Southwest
*** Southeast
*** Anthony Henday
* health: I would be remiss not to mention the most currently relevant way to divide up edmonton right now is with AHS's Covid 19 updates. It seems to me that Alberta Health Services divides Edmonton into 15 subzone/regions. You can see used repeatedly like in this Opiod-related deaths map or most relevant right now with Covid19's status updates by region or the interactive map (map in Geospatial tab with "Local geographic area"). CTV News also has a map labelling AHS's subzones. Capital Health has a 2007 report (p2) that also uses those subregions. I wouldn't recommend this method, but I've added it in my list for completeness. (NOTE: even though we might not want to organize the neighbourhoods by AHS subzones, it might be useful to put these as a column in the List)
*** Abbottsfield
*** Bonnie Doon
*** Castle Downs
*** Duggan
*** Eastwood
*** Jasper Place
*** Mill Woods South & East
*** Mill Woods West
*** NorthEast
*** Northgate
*** Rutherford
*** Twin Brooks
*** West Jasper Place
*** Woodcroft East
*** Woodcroft West
Goose (talk) 20:27, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I have only skimmed the above because it is a lot to digest. You may have already (or since) acquainted yourself with the Geographic sector breakdown thread above. Prior to implementation of the current organization, the article looked like this. Someone had arbitrarily decided what were five directional-based geographic areas beyond Downtown without any reference to reliable sources. That was WP:OR, and any other person could have selected a different amount of directions, or made different artificial boundaries associated with the five chosen directions. The best alternative found for the reorg in 2012 was based on city planning geographies because, if I recall correctly, they were factual, had municipal officiality, could be reliable sourced, and didn't result in any neighbourhoods being split by a higher-order geography. But truth be told, and you are correct, they are ultimately obscure and not widely known.Health and real estate shouldn't be options for a next generation reorg. Best candidates are political (ward-based) and geographical, but only if a reputable reliably sourced geographical system is found that doesn't split neighbourhoods, which would create confusion consequences to the average reader. The educational-based approach truly is a different political approach. It is lesser known and therefore less useful as you mention.If you are local, you may be aware that there is a proposed overhaul of ward boundaries before city council right now for approval. The overhaul was necessary after significant disproportionate growth during an extended high-growth period coupled with the recent major annexation to the south. The recommended new ward boundaries respect neighbourhood boundaries (and will likely be named in addition or as opposed to the traditional numbering system), as do a new set of "planning district" boundaries in the City's proposed new municipal development plan (MDP) that is also before city council for approval in the near future. I suggest any major reorg be paused until both the new wards (named, numbered or both) and the new MDP are approved. We can then compare, and determine which one is best option to proceed with. My money is on the new wards (which should last for at least 10 years) with planning districts simply being a column in the table. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geographic sector breakdown (is really city planning breakdown) and is not relevant 

message: Hwy43 On 4 August 2014 you edited the article to say "Strathcona Junction (formerly CPR West)". Some official-looking documents that I've seen don't say that Strathcona Junction is a neighbourhood, but rather an area in an area redevelopment plan which happens to include CPR West. But CPR West is also not a neighbourhood nowadays, rather it is a mere development control area and is inside CPR Irvine.
There is confusion, as I can see in "Naming Edmonton" which says CPR Irvine is "63 Avenue north to Whyte Avenue, 99 Street west to CP railway tracks ... At the beginning of the 1900s this land was owned by Nancy Irvine and called the Irvine Estate. In 1906 she sold part of her land to Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) and a station was built there in 1908. It was also here that the terminus of the Edmonton, Yukon and Pacific Railway was located. In 1912 the neighbourhood was still known as Irvine Estate. In 1997 the south side Canadian Pacific and Canadian National railway yards east of Gateway Boulevard were amalgamated into one neighbourhood, CPR Irvine." ... which is contradictory -- it is not "west to CP railway tracks" any more, because post-amalgamation it has to be west to Gateway Boulevard. But only partially, since Ritchie neighbourhood extends west of 99 Street, and some of the west boundary is not quite at Gateway Boulevard.
For example, go to edmonton.ca neighbourhood maps page and select location 8101 Gateway Boulevard -- you'll see this address, which is east of Gateway Boulevard, is in CPR Irvine. (Confirm by using the same page to search for neighbourhood = CPR Irvine.)
I am wondering whether CPR Irvine merits its own page, but not volunteering, since the small amount of information that I've found is confusing. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 21:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , CPR West was west of the Canadian Pacific rail line and CPR Irvine was to the east. CPR West is now Strathcona Junction. See Edmonton’s latest Wards & Standard Neighbourhoods map. I believe both neighbourhoods don’t have articles because, for whatever reason, there is an established convention that neighbourhoods that are predominantly commercial and/or industrial do not have articles. Hwy43 (talk) 05:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: CPR Irvine