I think most of this is covered under the East Coast or the Midwest, so it's actually not needed. -- Evan 11:05, 29 Oct 2003 (PST)
I dont think it hurts to have it. We arent going to avoid having overlap here and there, but if it really bugs you, we could move it over into an itinerary.Majnoona
I agree with Maj. Overlaps are unavoidable sometimes. As long as we don't have to write the same things twice, I don't think it's a problem, really. D.D. 11:35, 29 Oct 2003 (PST)
From a travel POV, this title is wrong. Almost no one visits the Great Lakes as a tourist destination and stays within the USA exclusively. The many attractions (including casinos) in Canada, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Windsor, Ontario and Toronto, Ontario are pretty common destinations for anyone coming for the first time. Also the Canadian $ is much lower.
Absolutely. Also for tourists it's more relevant to talk about cultural areas like "Dixie" than about "South", since the latter is technically a direction on a map, and could apply to say Arizona, whereas Dixie clearly does not. See "Nine Nations of North America" for a good analysis of where the cultural borders really are. The analysis is from 1981 but it seems to get more true all the time. Countries are really just an annoyance for many travellers, and in some regions like the EU, they are almost irrelevant given the Euro and lack of border controls.
It's true that within the EU minimal border controls exist, and the Euro is the currency from Finland to Portugal, but I wouldn't dare say culturally speaking Finland and Portugal are pretty much the same. Are we talking about cultural, economic, political regions, or regions otherwise defined? D.D. 12:38, 29 Oct 2003 (PST)
I think in 2003 it's a little premature to say that the country you're in is irrelevant to travelers. That all said, this article was started because we were trying to break down the United States of America into some easy-to-swallow chunks. I added the Great Lakes as one of the regions of the US, but then later realized that what I was thinking of -- Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota -- were normally considered part of the Midwest (I can pull up citations from "Fargo" and "Prairie Home Companion" to prove it if need be). By the time I'd erased "Great Lakes" from the USA page, Maj had already written this one. I think it's unnecessary, but Maj and DD are arguing for it. I dunno, seems like a scrapper to me. -- Evan 12:40, 29 Oct 2003 (PST)
After some more thinking, I would only scrap the '(United States of America)' part of the title. This could be some kind of disambiguation page or list of all the US states and Canadian provinces that border the Great Lakes. It could also contain some general information which is specific for this region. Does this sound like anything sensible? D.D. 12:51, 29 Oct 2003 (PST)
Another possibility is listing the Lakes themselves, eh? -- Evan 12:57, 29 Oct 2003 (PST)
Of course! For fishermen, boat enthousiasts, surfers, divers, ... They can be travellers too :-) D.D. 13:01, 29 Oct 2003 (PST)
I think we've got ourselves another way of seeing travel -- from the point of view of bodies of water, rather than from land. Interesting stuff! -- Evan 13:20, 29 Oct 2003 (PST)