Renaming London?

[ssiguy]

I remember when I was a kid in the 1970s and they went thru this debate, it comes up every generation and then passes. London is a great name ......keep it.

[MolsonExport]

Fraudtanatown.
Fahriburgh
Best-deCicco City

Call it: Western

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Wharn

Great, we'd have another city to add to our collection of European capital namesakes: Warsaw, Vienna, Dublin, Athens, Brussels, Paris, London and Berlin too! On top of that we'd have another case of City Confusion Syndrome, complete with dozens of "The Russians took Berlin" jokes.

Don't forget Waterloo (the one that has eclipsed its European namesake!). Actually I suspect that many in Kitchener would be fine with the idea of reverting to the name Berlin (or Waterloo, but that's another story!).

[haljackey]

It's come up again... Change.org petition:

https://www.change.org/p/city-of-lon...-to-new-london

New London?

[Rosso Corsa]

Originally Posted by haljackey

It's come up again... Change.org petition:

https://www.change.org/p/city-of-lon...-to-new-london

New London?

I like it. Interesting idea.

[Scarface]

Originally Posted by haljackey

It's come up again... Change.org petition:

https://www.change.org/p/city-of-lon...-to-new-london

New London?

Since you brought it up was this line in any previous petition??

We need to sell London as a 21st century global hub where anyone can test and implement new ideas, new discoveries and new technologies.

Just to say it you can leave it or change it I don't think it would change the fact London ON will always be London ON, and won't really let go of it's roots unless everything changes. Meaning complete disconnect from London, England Change the city name all street, and park names that would be considered to be named after streets, and park of "Old London"... I don't think people would go that far but no matter if it's called London, New London, or something completely different as long as the people still act the same towards any proposed project it will not become (as the petitioners said) a 21st Century city. Just the same city with a different name.

But of course that's just my opinion.

P.S. I'd also like to point out Dieppe, NB was named after Dieppe France, and is one of the fastest growing cities in New Brunswick. They din't change there names to do it but put money into there City (A town when the expansion started). Just saying

[HillStreetBlues]

The proposal is to rename the city in honour of the formerly great whaling port in Connecticut?

Scarface is right on: it's not the name of the city that's led to the backwards reactionary thinking among many residents, and changing the name won't fix it.

Maybe if Canada goes to war with the mother country there will be a knee-jerk movement to rename the city for some important warmonger (yes, I too wish Kitchener were still Berlin, and think it would be fine for it to join Waterloo under that name).

[manny_santos]

I'd rather change the name to Quahog than New London.

[Architype]

Originally Posted by haljackey

If London was to change it's name, do you have any ideas what it could be called? I'm drawing a blank myself.

Anyways, worth thinking about?

How about Londinium ?

[MolsonExport]

Nodnol

[haljackey]

[hyritchie]

My dad (lifelong Londoner) always thought the city should change it's name to Springbank. Add that to the growing list.

[Scarface]

Originally Posted by hyritchie

My dad (lifelong Londoner) always thought the city should change it's name to Springbank. Add that to the growing list.

I've heard of places called Springfield, or Springdale, but never Springbank except a road... I think there is a Springbank Rd. in London.

[HillStreetBlues]

I think Springbank is a great suggestion, but I'm guessing that your dad is a West Londoner, right? I'm not sure if that would have city-wide appeal.

Why not London-upon-Thames? That would distinguish us from that other London, wouldn't it?

[ssiguy]

As a born and bred Londoner {Strathroy/London} I can attest to this conversation coming up every decade or so.

In the 70s there was talk of changing it's name but you have to remember that at the same time the conversation would also turn to that never ending discussion........The London Ring Road. I guess why they keep coming up occasionally...........neither will ever come to pass.

[haljackey]

Talkin smack about London's name

• Video Link

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Nodnol

This is the best one yet, it even gives a nod to London's commie-block roots.

Nodnolingrad would be perfect in my opinion.

[HillStreetBlues]

Originally Posted by haljackey

Talkin smack about London's name

• Video Link

That guy's not funny, but it's nice to get a mention.

[ue]

Sorry for resurrecting an old thread, but I just stumbled across this discussion. I'm actually quite surprised that basically everyone in this thread is cool with the status quo, and the only people bringing forth other ideas are doing so in jest.

To me, London was always a terribly unoriginal name for a large city. I'm glad Kitchener changed their name; it avoids confusion and removes the need to affix "Ontario" to the end of every statement involving the city. I think it's alright, though still ultimately silly, for smaller towns and cities (eg Paris, Ontario).

There was a discussion years ago in Edmonton about branding ourselves without affixing "Alberta" to the end, because we wanted to be able to market ourselves as a destination in and of itself, that people shouldn't need to have further clarification for. It seems like that attitude does not exist in London, where the provincial status quo is considered fine enough. Or am I missing something?

To those that say Dieppe or Halifax or wherever are also named for other places -- sure that's true. You can say the same for Edmonton and Calgary as well. But in all of those cases, the place they're named for is significantly smaller so as to avoid any sort of confusion. Nobody is unsure which Halifax you mean when you say you're going to Halifax. London? Not so much. Actually, no, they usually think you mean the English one. This seems to be a fundamental image problem for London, Ontario.

Frankly, I don't get why a place would like to basically exist as a reference to somewhere else, complete with same river and other place names (because may as well commit to the schtick). Maybe there's a different mentality in Southwestern Ontario, and I don't mean to come across as preachy, but I would think that a place like London would want to forge its own path rather than be in the shadow of the former colonial behemoth.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by ue

Sorry for resurrecting an old thread, but I just stumbled across this discussion. I'm actually quite surprised that basically everyone in this thread is cool with the status quo, and the only people bringing forth other ideas are doing so in jest.

To me, London was always a terribly unoriginal name for a large city. I'm glad Kitchener changed their name; it avoids confusion and removes the need to affix "Ontario" to the end of every statement involving the city. I think it's alright, though still ultimately silly, for smaller towns and cities (eg Paris, Ontario).

There was a discussion years ago in Edmonton about branding ourselves without affixing "Alberta" to the end, because we wanted to be able to market ourselves as a destination in and of itself, that people shouldn't need to have further clarification for. It seems like that attitude does not exist in London, where the provincial status quo is considered fine enough. Or am I missing something?

To those that say Dieppe or Halifax or wherever are also named for other places -- sure that's true. You can say the same for Edmonton and Calgary as well. But in all of those cases, the place they're named for is significantly smaller so as to avoid any sort of confusion. Nobody is unsure which Halifax you mean when you say you're going to Halifax. London? Not so much. Actually, no, they usually think you mean the English one. This seems to be a fundamental image problem for London, Ontario.

Frankly, I don't get why a place would like to basically exist as a reference to somewhere else, complete with same river and other place names (because may as well commit to the schtick). Maybe there's a different mentality in Southwestern Ontario, and I don't mean to come across as preachy, but I would think that a place like London would want to forge its own path rather than be in the shadow of the former colonial behemoth.

I'll admit to being very conscious of this and I always avoid using provinces when talking about specific cities. Suffixes are needed when you talk about places like Estevan, SK and Sussex, NB not Edmonton or Moncton. I know it's stupid, but it drives me crazy when I see lists of cities (usually American ones) without suffixes, while Vancouver gets BC (or even worse, Canada).

As far as London goes, I didn't say anything the first time around since I didn't think it was my place, but I'll interfere now I think it should change it's name. It's half a million people and a half-major city within the country. It shouldn't have to be constantly separated from one of the most important cities in the world.