Talk:Halifax area

Sources

Like many other articles on Florida's regions, this one is unsourced; however, unlike most of them, I can't find any good sources for it at all. The "Fun Coast" is not mentioned in Lamme & Oldakowski's "Spinning a New Geography of Vernacular Regional Identity: Florida in the Twenty-First Century", which includes most of the other regions. A quick Google search reveals that the term "Fun Coast" has in fact been used to some extent in Daytona since the 1990s, but I can't find any sources that actually discuss its use.[1] Further, there is another, evidently better known "Funcoast" in Ohio,[2] and even in Florida the name has also been used in both St. Petersburg and Ft. Lauderdale.[3] "Fun Coast" shows up on the Daytona Chamber of Commerce's website[4] but not Flagler County's.[5] I'm not sure what to do with this article.
Lamme & Oldakowski note that the Daytona area has also been called the "Surf Coast", but that this appears to have declined significantly. They also say locals typically call the area the "Halifax region". The latter appears to be supported by a Google Books search for "Halifax region"+Florida.[6] I might suggest we move this article to Halifax region (Florida) and overhaul it, adding in information on the "Surf Coast" and "Fun Coast" names.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:55, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I finally got around to rewriting. I'll be moving the article to Halifax area shortly, as that's the form that actually appears in Lamme and Oldakowski's survey. I should note that the survey also mentions simply "Daytona", but I expect that's more common as a shorthand for Daytona Beach specifically.--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

If you ever visit Palm Coast in person, you may be shocked to find that many businesses have incorporated "Fun Coast" into their business name (I.E. Fun Coast Realty). Gamweb (talk) 04:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

That may well be, but until it appears in reliable published sources it doesn't do us any good as far as the article goes.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Flagler County

Flagler County is shown as part of the Halifax Area on the article's map. So shouldn't Palm Coast be listed in the cities list?Inkan1969 (talk) 05:07, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that the sources don't link Palm Coast to the Halifax area. The closest we have are the couple of sources saying Flagler County was part of the "Fun Coast" promotional campaign. However, this name isn't widely known or covered, and we have the Lamme & Oldakowski source that specifically that most people still call the Daytona area "Daytona" or the "Halifax area". The picture does need to change to remove Flagler County, however.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:42, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Objection

I was the creator of the article "Fun Coast" and object that I was not notified of any discussion to move/merge it with "Halifax area." I was not able to voice my opinion, pro or con. Gamweb (talk) 07:07, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry you missed it, but I left a detailed explanation of the problems with "Fun Coast" in April 2012[7] and got no objection for over eight months when I rewrote it. The new material is all well sourced.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:14, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Volusia County has their tourism bureaus divided into three regions: Halifax (Daytona area), Southeast (New Smyrna Beach area) and West Volusia (Deland-Deltona area). Therefore, "Halifax area" only includes the Daytona area (Daytona Beach, Daytona Beach Shores, Holly Hill, Ormond Beach, Ponce Inlet). The other two tourism bureaus (along with Flagler County) would make up the "Fun Coast" tourism marketing area, and not part of the Halifax area. The idea behind the "Fun Coast" was to unify the smaller tourism marketing areas into a larger one, containing all of Flagler County and Volusia County. Gamweb (talk) 04:49, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Remember, all articles need to be based on reliable sources. The Lamme and Oldakowski survey is the source saying that "Halifax area" or "Daytona" are the common ways of referring to the Daytona Beach area. They also discuss the "Surf Coast" and note it's in decline. They don't mention "Fun Coast" and in fact I've yet to turn up any sources that actually discuss this name (as opposed to just using it). As "Fun Coast" is intended to include Flagler County it's clearly supposed to include a wider area than the others, but I don't think it's so different that it's out of place being mentioned in this article. At this point, the article basically discusses regional identities of the area around Daytona Beach. If you have any reliable sources on the name please bring them up and we may be able to include them.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I can counter by stating I have never heard of the publication you are holding up as a "reliable source." On the other hand, I hold in my hands a number of documents published by Volusia County Government and the three tourism burueas in the county. Also, any experienced editor knows that it is "usual and customary" to notify an article's creator and major contributors on their "talk pages" that a major change is being proposed on a Wikipedia article. I never received any such notification about the article I created. Please note that I live and work in Daytona Beach, and and active in the local tourism industry. Gamweb (talk) 22:52, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, I apologize for not notifying you when I suggested the changes over two years ago. However, there's nothing out of process about it, considering that I left a detailed explanation of the issues on the talk page that went without comment for 8 months before I started work, and the article had been tagged for referencing improvement for three years before that.

As for the source, Southeastern Geographer is an academic journal published by the University of North Carolina Press. The authors of the article are geographers from the University of Florida and Jacksonville University, respectively. This is a reliable source and just about the best source one could hope for in an article like this. I can't see how tourist promotions would be reliable sources. Perhaps they could be primary sources, but we have to be very careful how we use those, especially in cases where they're explicitly written for promotional purposes.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)