I think this may be going too far. I'll cite as example of permutations the current city of Louiseville in Québec, which has a long history, but not under that name:
The seigneurie of Rivière-du-Loup was created in 1665 or 1672 (depending on sources and what they base themselves on).
It was served by missionaries from 1714, ie only had a mission and not a church per se until 1786, when it officially got its own parish priest. The parish name applied was St-Antoine-de-Padoue throughout. One finds references to it under St-Antoine de la Rivière-du-Loup over this time period. Parish territory limits were set in 1722.
The parish municipality of St-Antoine-de-la-Rivière-du-Loup was etablished by ordinance on 1 July 1845.
On 19 May 1879 the municipality of the village of Rivière-du-Loup got renamed Louiseville in honour of the youngest daughter of Queen Victoria, married to the then governor general of Canada. This was part of a split of the existing village. Which parts of the village went where would need in depth study.
In 1988, Louiseville and the village of St-Antoine-de-la-Rivière-du-Loup fused together to become a greater Louiseville. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louiseville
(sources are in French, since English sources lack detail)
Rivière-du-Loup was sometimes called Rivière-du-Loup-en-Haut to disambiguate it from the Rivière-du-Loup which is on Gaspé peninsula.
So, from the above, can anybody tell who was living in which part of Rivière-du-Loup? Few records distinguish between the parish municipality of St-Antoine.... and the village municipality of Rivière-du-Loup. Louiseville is in there, obviously, but only after 1879. And there was only one church there for the longest time.
So, creating categories that try to follow all these permutations and trying to name them with all the variations etc that also apply, except for Louiseville, which is post-confederation in any case, is going to be counter-productive. There's currently a gap in time for categories for this location due to all these fancy goings-on.
Only in instances where there is ambiguity would I expand location names, and I certainly wouldn't add the country to all of them unless there is ambiguity, like Isle-de-France recently discussed in categorization, there's one in Mauritius history (it's earliest name), and there's the region in France.