YOU CAN EDIT THIS PAGE! Just click any blue "Edit" link and start writing!

Talk:South America

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search

This page has content translated from its Portuguese version based on work by Evan Prodromou, and Wikitravel users Episteme, Rmx and Pmichelazzo as well as anonymous users. Ricardo (Rmx) 21:38, 18 August 2006 (EDT)


Isn't it way too much countries? I think it's better if we'd come up with some logical regions in South America. Like:

- Andean states (Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia)
- Southern Cone (Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay)
- The Guianas (Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana)
- Brazil

Globe-trotter 15:30, 21 December 2008 (EST)

I think this is a pretty good exception to our 9 rule, I don't see a need to do regions for South America, it's manageable as-is, and while it would be possible to do regions similar to what you suggest, they aren't really well known and I think would feel forced... unlike Asia where the regions really make sense and are known regions outside of our hierarchy – cacahuate talk 00:53, 22 December 2008 (EST)
I totally agree, let's leave it as-is. Globe-trotter 13:08, 24 December 2009 (EST)


This one is a little trickier than the other destinations list, but nonetheless I only have two suggestions:

  1. Drop Cuzco for La Paz, since we'll otherwise have three Peruvian destinations on top of each other (and because La Paz is both important and incredibly unique)
  2. Drop Cartagena for Bogota, because the latter is both an interesting cosmopolitan city, and the third largest metropolis on the continent

I understand the rationale behind listing Cuzco and Cartagena, since they are both more alluring tourist destinations than my suggestions, but travel is much broader than tourism, and at the continental level I think we really need to just hit the biggest destinations (be it for business, study, backpacking, shopping, sightseeing, or whatever else). --Peter Talk 13:20, 17 December 2009 (EST)

Certainly at the continental level there's a good argument for just picking the top nine destinations by pure numbers, as long as they aren't all clustered in one continental section. I was just noticing yesterday that North America could use some work; it doesn't list any cities at all. LtPowers 15:09, 17 December 2009 (EST)
I added a list here, to North America, and Central America, just to get the ball rolling on the talks. Switching those cities looks good. It seems much easier to represent more areas in South America, as opposed to some of the other regions. ChubbyWimbus 15:27, 17 December 2009 (EST)

Other destinations

Nice list! I'd only make one change, and that would be to add Iguaçu Falls. It's hard to say which should go to make room, but I'm tempted to suggest the Pantanal. --Peter Talk 13:20, 17 December 2009 (EST)

I'd remove Amazonia; it's just too large to be useful. LtPowers 15:10, 17 December 2009 (EST)
I agree with LtPowers. I think the same applies to the Andes, also way too large to really be considered a "destination". --Globe-trotter 16:39, 13 November 2011 (EST)