wrong definition of a category name ''Québec''

Question

I just corrected a profile which had had the [[Category: Québec]] added to it, incorrectly.  Then I took a look at the category definition, which states it is a province created in 1867, and earlier dates should be under Canada East category.  

Sorry, but there are large errors in this, first of all there was a ''Province of Québec'' instituted by the English shortly after their conquest of New France.  That was the first use of the term, before then it was New France, with its various subdivisions.  Then after some years it was changed to lower Canada, with upper Canada being present day Ontario.  Then there was another change, mostly administrative from the looks of things, to Canada-East Canada-West, the thing bounced back and forth for years in usage.

I suggest the definition of the category ''Québec'' be changed to only be applicable to dates after Confederation of 1867.  This will avoid confusion.

Comments

Perhaps, to avoid confusion, we should have a category of "Province of Quebec 1763-91" to apply to profiles where that applies, to distinguish from post-Confederation Québec.

Thus, the sequence would be:

Canada, New France: <1763

Province of Quebec 1763-91: 1763-91

Lower Canada: 1791-1841

Canada East, United Province of Canada: 1841-1867

Québec, Canada : >1867

---

that is pretty much what I think.  The category was tagged onto a profile which dated from New France days.  Just didn't fit with the agreed upon designations in Québécois project.  Although I think we may be going overboard on categorizing everything under the sun moon and stars sixty ways from Sunday.  ;)

---

The Canadian regional categories are indeed a mess and I have tried working on it in the past, on behalf of the Categorization Project, but I haven't had much luck recruiting helpers!  If this is something that the Québécois Project (or its individual members) are interested in helping out with, I would love some help!  (The issue is not just the fact that the region changed names/administration multiple times, but also that regional categories are supposed to be created in multiple languages, i.e. separate French and English categories for each different named version of the place that we now call "Québec.")

---

Actual place names should not get translated, ie Trois-Rivières for example should not be translated to Three-Rivers, even though that is indeed the meaning of the name.  Montreal could get 2 categories, since the English spelling without the accent is easily understood by all, but tehcnically, it is called Montréal.  With the accent.

As far as regional categories go, after confederation is simple, the provinces as they were added had a name and stuck to it.  Prior to that, indeed things get wild, particularly with the Canada-East/West Lower/Uppper-Canada, which were actually used concurrently in everyday usage.  In school, I do recall that there was Upper and Lower Canada, but Canada-East/West never got mentioned at all, so may have been strictly a governmental paperpusher sort of thing.  :D  I can help you out for this part of the country if you want.

---

Danielle, you are spot on!  One of the possible solutions is to have a separate set of strictly post-confederation categories since, as you said, they were pretty consistent after that date.  I will keep you and everyone else who is interested apprised of what the Categorization Project is thinking!

---

But again, please distinguish between place field names and category names. I don't think they're the same. What goes into a place field may be different than what goes into a category name. All depends on the *purpose* of the category.

---

But Québec as a provincial category should have lots and lots of sub-categories, cities & towns & villages, which would be the appropriate thing to enter as a category on an individual profile, not the provincial category unless they were an elected representative of the whole province, such as a prime minister.

Answer 1

If you want to get technical "New France" was the entire French holdings in North America (including Louisiana, Acadia, etc.) The area that is now roughly the provinnce of Quebec (and part of what is now Ontario) was properly known as "Canada"  but was also known as "New France" likely because it contained the 'seat of power' within the continent.

Québec was an administrative division of the French territory of Canada and definitely predates the English 'conquest' - hierarchically the administrative name (rendered in English) Québec District, Canada, New France would be correct. Each District within Canada had a governor but the governor of Quebec District was senior to the others. He was also senior to the governor's of the other territories/colonies of New France (I.e. the governor of Quebec District was also Governor-General of all of New France)

"Province of Quebec", as you say, was used by the English after the conquest. This was later divided into Upper and Lower Canada. These separate British colonies were united into the "United Province of Canada" at which point Lower Canada (or most of it, at least) became Canada East (i.e Canada East, United Province of Canada). At Confederation Canada East became the current province of "Québec, Canada."

Comments

Note: in saying one named place became another I am of course speaking in broad terms, and ignoring the shifts in boundaries.

---

And in the time it took me to write the above posts (with interruptions) Greg has already given a much more succinct version that is effectively the same as mine.

---

administrative districts were just that, administrative, and this was more of a judicial area than anything else.  There was a governor of the whole colony, and there were governors in Québec, Trois-Rivières and Montréal for the districts as such.  But tagging a New France profile with the Québec tag as it is currently defined in the category page just did not fit.

There needs to be some sort of coordination between categorization project and other projects, like Québécois project.

Answer 2

Shouldn't profiles be in a lower-level category?

So far as I can see, the profiles go in the villages, or whatever they're called, and the villages all go in Québec.

Maybe the same villages could also be listed under Canada East etc, if they existed at that time, but few are.  In any case that's an issue for the people managing the hierarchy.

There's the separate question of whether there should be different categories for the same village at different periods (please no).

Comments

RJ, your last point, "There's the separate question of whether there should be different categories for the same village at different periods (please no)" is at the crux of my problem with sorting out the Canadian regional categories on behalf of the Categorization Project.  If I follow WikiTree's current guidelines, not only should there be different categories for the same village for each period, but there should also be different categories for the same village in each period in different languages (a lot of villages were bilingual French and English).  This really bothers me, but a satisfactory alternative hasn't been arrived at yet.  I appreciate any input people have. 

---

Sarah, please point to where the instructions are telling you that Category naming has to follow the same convention as Place field names.

Answer 3

Before making any changes, ask yourselves: What are we trying to accomplish with the use of categories?

Place name fields require that we use the name as used at the time of the event.

But is that also the rule for categories? I don't think so.

If categories are to be used to help people find things, what is the most appropriate wording to use?

Comments

the problem stems from what was written as a definition of this category, stating that pre-1867 things should be tagged Canada-East.  Which is totally a wrong definition.  Categorization project needs to liaise with project people BEFORE creating categories that are not following the actual facts of the matter.  There has been extensive debate over how things should be called in location field for Québécois project already.  And there are existing categories, such as those created by George Blanchard under the censuses of New France and tied to Chronicles of New France.  Those are place name categories.  I don't see how a category ''Québec'' for the whole province will be useful, particularly since that is also the name of a city.  Confusion galore.

---

Québec is useful for drilling down.  Find menu -> Categories -> Regions -> North America -> Canada -> Québec -> etc.  The main contents are the subcategories.  Which will be places or topics (eg Québec Unsourced Profiles).

---

Ah oui, Ville de Québec, Québec City, Quebec City or Québec, Québec. Indeed confusion galore! Seriously, you've made some good points here, Danielle.