Talk:Great Lakes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Version 0.5
 This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
Archive
Archives
/Archive 2004, 2005, 2006


Contents

[edit] Great Lakes Water Compact

This seems to be moving forward and might deserve its own page.

http://www.cleveland.com/editorials/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1211617990162900.xml&coll=2 swain (talk) 15:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why part of the US Wiki?

The Great Lakes are much more significant to Canada than they are to the US, and the majority of the lakes are IN Canada. Why is this article part of the US Wiki? It should be part of the Canadian one.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.206.228.94 (talk)

...and the majority of the lakes are IN Canada.
There are five Great Lakes. Four of which have Canada on one side and the United States on the other and one Great Lake (I'll let you figure out which one) is 100 percent, completely, totally withIN U.S. waters. Therefore, your logic is a little backward on this one. Sorry to hurt your Canadian pride but facts are facts. —MJCdetroit 01:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, there are four large lakes, all of which are divided between the two countries. Michigan is a bay of Lake Michigan-Huron. It's no more a separate lake that St. George's Bay, which BTW lies entirely within Canada. kwami (talk) 21:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
It is interesting to refer to Lake Michigan as a bay of Lake Michigan-Huron, as Lake Michigan contains nearly the same surface area as Lake Huron and 40% more total water than Lake Huron. I wonder if there is another example elsewhere in the world of a bay being 50% or more of the total body of water.68.72.250.165 (talk) 16:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Couldn't it also be part of WikiProject Canada? I'd be in favor of it. Both countries exert sovereignty over parts of it. --Pesco (talk) 02:05, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
That makes perfect sense. Silverchemist (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

And in fact they are involved in several bilateral treaties concerning them, and also have a hand in the pending Great Lakes Compact. I don't know if the issue is resolved, but if I had a vote, I would vote that there be concurrent jurisdiction over the articles, as it fairly reflects sovereignty, facts, shared interests and regional politics. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 02:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Stan

[edit] Foot to meter

In the section on shipping there is:

  1,000 by 305-foot (105 by 32-m)

At 3.3 feet / meter at least one set of figures is wrong. Would someone who knows the correct figures please correct this. 75.68.245.172 20:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC) Jim Lillie @ comcast dot net

Actually both were wrong! The correct figures are 1,000 by 105-foot (305 by 32-m). Thanks for pointing it out. Have you thought of creating a Wikipedia account? You can do it here. --Pesco 00:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References needed

There are a lot of statistics and figures listed in this article, and almost none have references. I'll try to help in my areas of interest, but everybody should try to help justify some of the stats listed in this article. With a little work we can remove the "references" tag and improve the reliability of this article. --Pesco 00:19, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No snow out of a clear sky

I live in Eastern Michigan, and while you hear a lot about lake effect, I have never heard of it making snow out of a clear sky. :P

My understanding in Western Michigan is that the lake effect occurs up to maybe 10 miles inland. No source is specifically cited concerning lake effect in the article, however. -Agyle 13:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] photos

we have 6 photos in the article, with ismap attribute to img element, actually, we can combine 6 photos into one. can someone spend some effort to do this? actually, most pictures in wiki have such problems: no neighbourhood information. a photo can provide much more information, and we don't need so many separated ones. Jackzhp 22:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Invasive species

a few were not mentioned like the Spiny water flea among others could have been added... i could do it eventually... but its just requires a little work —Preceding unsigned comment added by Huzzahmaster018 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Big edit

I just reverted a really big edit that hid a lot of unrelated changes behind a comment about adjusting coordinates. Some of the stuff in it was useful (grammar fixes and such), but a lot of useful information was deleted (particularly in the invasive species section), and it introduced at least one genuine error (the Rochester ferry actually did run for two seasons). Perhaps some of the grammar cleanup can be done as smaller edits? Susan Davis 06:30, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of cities along the Great Lakes

I'm guessing that someone merged that article with this one, and then deleted the cities, anyone care to restart the list, as it is still linked to this page. 99.232.0.207 04:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lake Superior Size

This article currently says:

"Lake Superior—the largest by volume, area, and depth; larger than both Scotland and South Carolina"

While the comparison with Scotland seems unchallenged, looking at the figures in Wikipedia given for Lake Superior and SC it seems that this statement does not hold.

Moreover, the sq.mi. and sq.km. figures do not seem to match. Can someone clarify this pls? Thanks!

JRaue 17:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sea Lampreys - Vandalism?

The introductory paragraph says sea lamprey were introduced by Thomas Edison. This is not true. As the Lamprey article says, they entered the Great Lakes via the construction of artificial canals such as the Erie and Welland Canals.143.236.35.204 16:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing the entry, which has been there since Oct 28. I removed it. Not sure if that was a nonsense edit or what. --Pat 05:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Lake Effect - capitalization

Someone has capitalized The Lake Effect, changing it from The lake effect. This seems incorrect to me. Any debate on reverting this edit?--Pat (talk) 08:28, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Major edits

I've made a lot of major edits to this page, but I'll be adding them incrementally so any potential problems with my edits won't cause them all to be reverted together. If you have any comments or criticisms, please feel free to post them below. Mr. Absurd 04:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Laurentian?

The article began "The Laurentian Great Lakes are..." Since the meaning of "Laurentian" is not obvious, I went to linkify it; but it seems that Laurentian can mean of or related to (1) the St. Lawrence River or (2) Laurentia, the North American Craton, a large geographical area. Which of the two meanings is intended is not clear, since both apply. Without knowing which one is meant, I cannot linkify it, therefore I removed the ambiguous term "Laurentian". If anyone knows which meaning applies, please restore and linkify. If both meanings are intended, the term is ambiguous and should not be restored. Herostratus (talk) 02:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why was Lake Champlain listed as part of the Great Lakes Hydrological System?

No water from the Great Lakes flows into Lake Champlain; no water from Lake Champlain flows into the Great Lakes.

The Great Lakes Basin map included in this article clearly does not include Lake Champlain. I have not found any maps from the US Geological Survey that includes Lake Champlain as part of the Great Lakes basin.

The only physical connection between the Great Lakes and Lake Champlain is that they both empty into the St. Lawrence River, via Lake Ontario and the Richelieu River respectively. If this qualifies Lake Champlain to be part of the Great Lakes, then the Ottawa River should be listed as part of the system as well (in the Rivers section) as it empties into the St. Lawrence upstream of where the Richelieu River empties into the St. Lawrence.

The only supporting evidence that can be shown for including Lake Champlain is described in the Modern History section of the Lake Champlain Wikipedia article, which details how, through a political sleight-of-hand, Lake Champlain was temporarily declared to be a Great Lake. 68.72.250.165 (talk) 19:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

By that argument, Lakes Erie and Ontario weren't Great Lakes during the Nipissing Stage, because their connection was similar to that of Champlain today. Lakes Algonquin, Duluth, and Chippewa were also not Great Lakes, but they're always presented as such. Champlain was formed with the Great Lakes, there were times when the melt-water level was such that it formed a single lake with them, and it is part of the same drainage basin today. What exactly is a "hydrological system"? It doesn't seem to be a well defined term. kwami (talk) 21:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I am assuming that by Nipissing Stage you are referring to the last panel in the article's 'Great Lakes Formation' graphic, illustrating the Great Lakes area as of approximately 4000 years ago. From the graphic, it appears that Lakes Erie and Huron are connected via the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair (actually a flooded river delta), and the Detroit River, much as Lakes Erie and Ontario are shown on the same graphic as being connected via the Niagara river.68.72.250.165 (talk) 17:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
An interesting question: 'What exactly is a hydrological system?' (hydrological system is not my term, it was in the article prior to my edits). I originally thought it to refer to a system of bodies of water that shared common interaction (i.e. flow of water or sharing of water). Following through the Wikipedia links it seems to imply that a 'hydrological system' can mean 'drainage basin', 'watershed', or even 'drains into a specific ocean'. By either a narrow or broad interpretation of 'hydrological system', both Lake Champlain and the Great Lakes are part of the St. Lawrence watershed; however, this is a Wikipedia article about the Great Lakes, not about the St. Lawrence River.68.72.250.165 (talk) 17:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, the 'Other Lakes' section of the article seems to list only lakes that currently exist within the Great Lakes basin, not lakes that have had a similar geological origin or prehistoric connection. You use the term 'was formed with the Great Lakes' - I take this to mean 'was formed at the same time, by the same geological process (melting glacial ice sheets), and in the same general geographic location'. Then by this standard Lake Winnipeg (formed from the prehistoric Lake Agassiz) would also qualify as part of the Great Lakes Hydrological System.68.72.250.165 (talk) 17:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

In response to kwami, Lakes Algonquin, Duluth, and Chippewa are never presented as Great Lakes. Check through any geography book. In fact, I've never heard of any of those, but, as a young child, I was taught in school to name all 5 Great Lakes (Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, Ontario) from largest to smallest, or any other possible order asked of me (I live in the Great Lakes region, so it's been engraved in my knowledge). I'm not sure how you came to think that way, but I can assure you that it must simply be your small area that calls them this. I wonder why, as it is very peculiar. Hmm... нмŵוτнτ 22:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

They are prior incarnations of the Great Lakes. kwami (talk) 23:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I interpreted your comment as that they are current lakes that are referred to as Great Lakes, currently. Misunderstanding! нмŵוτнτ 00:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
There was in fact a dozen or so years ago in the Congress an attempt to recharacterize Lake Champlain as a "Great Lake" so that it would get federal aid that was slated for the Great Lakes. I remember that it was written up in many papers and Time Magazine at the time.7&6=thirteen (talk) 02:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Stan

[edit] Third Coast or Fourth Coast?

The introduction has referred to the Great Lakes as being "Canada and the United States' fourth coast" but was recently altered to read " Canada and the United States' third coast". From a U.S. perspective there are three ocean coasts (Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf of Mexico); because of this the Great Lakes coastline is sometimes referred to in the United States as the Fourth Coast or North Coast. However, Canadians may view this differently; anyone from Canada care to weigh in with an opinion?69.14.180.255 (talk) 23:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Someone has now slipped in a new link at the bottom of this article, referencing Third Coast. While this linked Wikipedia article has no supporting references, a quick Google does reveal that people in Chicago and parts of Wisconsin do use the term to refer to their Great Lakes coastline.68.72.250.165 (talk) 21:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Should the Keweenaw_Peninsula be listed as an island of the Great Lakes?

"It is separated from the rest of the peninsula by the Keweenaw Waterway, a natural waterway which was dredged and expanded in the 1860s[1] across the peninsula between the cities of Houghton on the south side and Hancock on the north." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.73.221.222 (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] War of 1812

A line regarding the War of 1812 was added to the Historical Economy section. Does such a note belong in this section, or should there be a new section added? Also, the War of 1812 is discussed in its own article; would a summary of the Great Lakes theater of war (with a link to the War of 1812 article) be sufficient?68.72.250.165 (talk) 14:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other Lakes

Seems to me, this list is just a temptation for others to add their "favorite smaller lake that drains into the Great Lakes". Lake Winnebago is there, why not Lake Butte des Morts? How about Lake of the Woods, and all of those other lakes in the Boundary Waters of Minnesota/Ontario? Basically, what are the requirements to be in the list? 69.95.237.66 (talk) 16:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

  • I agree. I removed the section. The article is on the Great Lakes, which are a well-defined list of specific lakes. This article is not on the "Great Lakes Basin and smaller lakes that are located within it." Similar sections should also be removed. will381796 (talk) 17:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How many coasts

That one of our esteemed contributors opines that "a gulf is an extension of an ocean" does not answer the question of whether the Great Lakes should be denominated as the "third coast" or "fourth coast." Indeed, the links that I had clearly delineated the problem and the parameters. They were not meant to disparage the Gulf Coast, but to highlight the problem of the 'two coast' proponents ignoring both the Gulf Coast and the Great Lakes. 18:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC) Stan

I think the entire argument is rather silly. East coast. West Coast. Gulf coast. I wouldn't classify the great lake shore as a coast. Remove the entire mention of "third coast, fourth coast" etc. Problem solved. will381796 (talk) 18:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
==How many coasts==

That one of our esteemed contributors, opines that "a gulf is an extension of an ocean" does not answer the question of whether the Great Lakes should be denominated as the "third coast" or "fourth coast." Indeed, the links that I had clearly delineated the problem and the parameters. They were not meant to disparage the Gulf Coast, but to highlight the problem of the 'two coast' proponents ignoring both the Gulf Coast and the Great Lakes. I note that this has been part of the earlier discussion, and Hmwith has simply decided the issue for us all.

I don't think the blithe "problem solved" issue is rightly solved by getting rid of the mention of coasts. There are 650 (or more) lighthouses on this third (or fourth) coast, which you now say is 'not a coast.' This ignores a lot of coastline, water, and facts. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 18:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC) Stan
I would say that coasts are related to the large, navigable water bodies that make up continental boundaries. Lakes and rivers by definition are internal and have shorelines, not coasts. I checked Dictionary.com and it makes the distinction that coasts are more narrowly defined to seashores while shores can be on the sea, lakes, rivers, etc. We could talk about the Arctic coast, but not on this page. I respect the editor's right to argue to include the section but I vote against. I am opposed to having a section dedicated to such an argument; frankly I agree it would make us look silly. --Pat (talk) 02:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
It is entirely possible to discuss the lighthouses, water, shore and facts without having to give the shoreline the silly nickname of "third" or "fourth" coast. I completely agree with the removal of such terms just as I would support the removal of "first" or "second" coast from any description of the Atlantic or Pacific coastline. Such an unformal naming of the shore does not seem appropriate for an encyclopedic article. will381796 (talk) 12:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Re the "Coast" issue: I live in Detroit and have never heard of the Great Lakes being referred to as the Third Coast. However, a quick Google of 'third coast' reveals there is antedotal evidence on the web of people in the region (from Canada, Illinois, Wisconsin, etc.) using this term. I have heard people from Ohio refer to the Great Lakes as the North Coast. This "Coast" description probably doesn't belong in the first paragraph of the article; it might belong in it's own section (i.e. Other Names Used by the Locals for Referring to the Great Lakes). 68.72.250.165 (talk) 15:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the notion of a third vs fourth or whatever coast is problematic at best. Even if you look at the Third coast article, it says it refers to the Great Lakes, except when it refers to the Gulf Coast or even Nashville. Guess it's all based on perspective, in which case it doesn't belong in this article. Not being a "coast" in no way belittles the greatness of the Great Lakes. ~PescoSo say•we all 18:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Grands Lacs"

The use of a French translation of the English term "Great Lakes" seems a little strained to me in this context. If the argument for its use is being made from historical precedence, by extension most of the articles dealing with geographical subjects in eastern North America should also have a French language equivalent appearing in their opening sentence as well. In my opinion, although charming, it is not appropriate in an English language encyclopedia.cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 23:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, stating the French name in the opening sentence may not be the best idea, but what surprises me in this article is that there is nothing about the discovery of the Lakes by the European explorers and about the origin of their name. I know this can be can be found out in the articles about each Lake individually but I think we should add something about it in this article too and especially the origin of the name "Great Lakes" which I assume is probably a translation of the French name Grands Lacs. Anyway, I'm glad you give your opinion about this because you certainly know the history of North America better than me. Eventually, I've made some searches to support a potential writing about the names: [1] on michigan.gov and [2] on great-lakes.net (this one is already present in the External Links section) 16@r (talk) 19:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
As an aside, some really good sources about place names are listed in List of Michigan county name etymologies. Some are on line, and some are in print. I recognize this isn't about Michigan counties, but these scholarly sources are still relevant. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2008 (UTC) Stan