User:SouthWriter/Archives 3

USAR
Could you take a look at the newest revision of the United States Atlantic Remnant? Tell me what you think. And do you think it's ready for graduation? Arstar 04:19, October 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * I like what you did with the flag. I am not really sure why you want to keep the uninhabitable speck of land off of Haiti, but it seems that others agree with you that Haiti would not bother with claiming it, so I colored it red (instead of the blue you had).  About that, though, I might change the color again (the small size needs a contrasting colore (like the orange you have for the Bahamas).  I think I will change it once more, in fact, when I leave here.


 * The discussion on the page turned to whether the US Virgin Islands joined the ECF. If that can't be changed, then the USAR will need to be made as the de facto government of an autonomous state within the ECF (with jurisdiction over American citizens within the Federation).  Other than that, I think we're good to go on this. SouthWriter 05:05, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

I had a username but it was blocked
woul you be a nice chap and unblock it ty

nice try owen! but not signing stuff when your spelling is so terrible is kind of a give away!--Smoggy80 16:49, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

RE: Presidents in Wasteland Europe
Sorry, South, but all I did was move the page from "List of Presidents of United States" to "List of Presidents of the United States" (the Infoboxes on this Wiki have a habit of making ungrammatical links like that). It was already fully written when I found it. - Mister Sheen 10:52, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

That's okay. It must have been Arstarpool who assumed a progression there. Like I said, I haven't been active over there. So, though I adopted the USA in that timeline, I haven't done much with it. I laid out a timeline up to 1980 (George H.W. Bush getting elected), but haven't gone further. SouthWriter 18:10, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

Bible College
It's a simple matter of practicality. There is a small bible college a few miles from my farm. If my Doomsday analogue wants a college education, it's the best bet.

Yankovic270 18:12, October 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Maybe your "analogue" would not be as cynical as you are in OTL. :-)
 * I mean that in a good way, really. Your political views - and religious ones - might be quite different under the circumstances. I am assuming Steinbach Bible College, mostly because it is rural when compared to those near Winnipeg. Providence has moved a little bit away, but I would not consider it rural.
 * That being said, your present views may not be welcome there at Steinbach. You would most likely be very uncomfortable if they let you come out of respect to the law. They'd try to convert you for sure! That's not a bad thing, mind you, but you would be uncomfortable. :-) SouthWriter 18:42, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

I mean Providence College in Otterburne, Manitoba, though I might go to Steinbach. It depends on what the globally devastating nuclear war would do to my political and or religious beliefs. I might be more hopeful than in OTL, or I might start out as cynical (or even more cynical) than in OTL. If the latter, it is very likely that my time enrolled in the Bible college would slowly change my political and religious opinions for the better. Speaking of the Bible colleges, the increased population in said towns would probably make these instutions much larger than in OTL. Scavenged equipment and teachers from the abandoned colleges up noth would be a boon for these institutions.

Yankovic270 20:07, October 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * I 'm a little embarrassed. By eyeballing the to positions on google earth, I somehow got the impression that Providence was a lot closer than it is. It is actually about two miles further from downtown Winnipeg than is Steinbach. Both, though, are dangerously close when it comes to a nuclear blast or two going off over the capital city. I am sure that both Steinbach and Otterburne would indeed swell with survivors from Winnipeg. Since your grandfather (in this TTL) became prime minister, I would figure that you would be far less cynical. Providence seems to be a little less strict (considered Evangelical) that Steinbach (self-described "Anabaptist"). Here in Greenville, SC, it would be the difference in North Greenville University (Evangelical) and Tabernacle Bible College (Fundamentalist). Here both are Baptist, but with different attittudes.


 * If there is any way that I can help you be less cynical, please let me know. It intrigues me that you list yourself as a Leninist Communist at such a young age. What's the deal with that? Is your family politically active or did you come upon these views on your own? I know, I'm meddling. But I really am curious. SouthWriter 00:52, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

I would believe that one nuke would be plenty for the task of neutralizing Winnipeg. Another factor that might decrease my cynicism is the abscense of the United States. Much of my cynical views of the world came from me observing American history. I saw a once-great nation wasting their surplus, in turn gaining a mind-bogglingly large deficit and start a war that probably won't end in the forseeable future. My dislike (and at time outright hatred) of the Republican Party stems from the 8 years of Bush's horrendously incompentant rule. The reason I became a Communist is quite simple. I am ashamed to say that I read a copy of the Communist Manifesto before I managed to finish the Bible. I was never able to get past the part where it simply states the family trees of these uninteresting families (This guy begat that guy, that guy begat that other guy). I did one of those online political views test and I looked to see who in history had a similar set of views. Guess who it was? It was Lenin.

Yankovic270 01:33, October 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, Dustin, I cannot make the USA go away. In fact, the struggles of the USA in light of the war that the terrorist brought to our shores (that's right, THEY started it), should not have caused such a radical departure from the heritage of your family. I see a young man, a child of 10 if my math is right, being turned into a radical by losing faith in a country not his own. It saddens me.


 * I think that you are using the genealogies as an excuse for not reading the Bible, though. The Old Testament, for sure, has two short lists in the early chapters, and some longer ones in the books of Numbers, then nothing of significance along that line until the historical books (especially 1 Chronicles). However, anyone can skim those lists and get the gist of it. As a history buff, I would think that the story itself would grasp you! The New Testament has two lists - one in the very first chapter and another about forty or so chapters later in the third "book," which is a bit longer. These lists are a significant in understanding the story of Jesus the Christ, but they too can be skimmed to get the gist of it all.


 * The online quiz, which by its very nature, is quite vague. Lenin on paper believed in a simple concept of absolute "democracy" where everyone took care of each other. He seems to have lived a very simple life himself. In that, he may have endeared himself to millions of the oppressed class. But the socialism that Canada has embraced - along with most of Europe - is a far cry from that of communism. Communism has failed everywhere it is tried. This is because, in my opinion, it has given up on God, and put far too much faith in man. Man, in turn, has proved far less reliable than Lenin hoped for, leading instead to depotism - trying to force mankind into a mold that acts as a prison. That's right, it holds back mankind from its potential - for both good and bad.


 * Well, I could launch into a political debate, but I won't. I challenge you -- go back to the Bible. Skim the parts that are repetitive - lists of names and repetitions in all those unusual laws - and read it for the story. But at the same time as your trying to read it as a story, go to the New Testament. Sit down and read the gospel of Mark. You should be able to read through it in an evening (its less than 40 pages of text). That is the story of the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ in its basic form. The English Standard Version seems to be the best out there, though the New King James Version has a beauty to it if you love reading the English language (think Shakespeare, writing English before it was corrupted!).


 * After Mark, read Paul's letter to the Galatians. Short, powerful and practical, that letter was probably the Apostles first letter to churches where he had worked. To find out about that, read the Acts of the Apostles (second of the works of a Roman doctor named Luke - an excellent historian). Luke's story of Jesus was based on research (he probably had read Mark's account), and he continues that story. Combined his works (Luke and Acts) are about as long as the book of Genesis. That is why I encourage you to read Mark first! By the time you've read through Genesis (about a hundred pages), you will have gotten a feel for the Old Testament historical literature. Exodus is a blend of history and laws -- foundational to understanding the rest of the Bible. Take it slow, but don't get bogged down in the laws. Most of the laws are meant to be symbolic (meaning they're pointing to something else) so don't worry about "figuring them out."


 * In the middle of the Old Testament, you will find poetic literature Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, and Ecclesiastes. This can be "skipped" when reading through the OT as a story. Job, though, probably does not look like poetry. It is a drama -- a very interesting story about the meaning of suffering. Ecclesiastes can be depressing -- but read it to the end and you see the purpose.


 * The New Testament, though, is compact. The first three books tell the same story -- the life of Jesus -- in about the same way. The fourth book is the story of Jesus as recalled over fifty years later by his best friend on earth. It is very different from the others, grouped around several miracles that Jesus did. It is written very beautifully, though, and is the most personal of the stories. Various letters follow Acts, most of which can be placed within the framework of that book. The letters of Peter and Jude, and those to Timothy and Titus, were written close to the fall of Jerusalem. That period also includes the book of Hebrews (a treatise requiring a knowledge of those laws in the first five books of the Bible). At the end is an Apocalyptic message -- written in highly symbolic language that a reader would not understand unless he had read the whole Old Testament and the story of Jesus' life.


 * How's that, I got us from politics back to "Bible College." I hope that these guidlines will help you take your hopes away from human governments (be they communistic, socialistic, of democratic), and back on things that "really matter" - that is, things that don't change every two to four years! SouthWriter 03:08, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

Indiana Obsolete
South, if you look at the archived discussion you will see that Arstar requested it to be marked as obsolete. So when I saw his request and no objections I marked it as obsolete. If you disagree with Arstar you should bring it up with him. Mitro 16:40, October 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * I should have known it was Arstar's doings. Somehow I didn't get notice of the discussion being moved.  I certainly get notice of the recommendation for obsolescence.  It does not meet the criteria to be called "obsolete."  I really think that Alex, having taken over Sunkist's efforts, became frustrated with it.  Is he the one that archived the discussion?  So, not even Sunkist objected.  Very odd.  I have allowed myself to waste the morning checking my email as it is, though, so I had better get to work getting useful stuff done.  Maybe I'll "have it out" with young Alex a little later.  --SouthWriter 16:51, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Long time no see
How's it going? I was only asking Vexacus what he had in mind, since he knows more about Japan than I do. Also, when I was talking about change, I wasn't referring to World War II or the timeline itself, but how the borders are between the US and CS, and how their expand after the Civil War. I made an entire section on the talk page, I would love to get feedback from you. ^_^ --NuclearVacuum 20:28, October 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Going pretty well. I was reading it a bit ago, before I went out to watch a video at my church -- a very enlightening and entertaining challenge to the theory of evolution.  But back to alternate history.  :-)


 * I have read and commented at the talk page for Two Americas. As I am typing this I am listening to a history lesson concerning man's attempt to bring in the perfect world.  I am trying to multiask. SouthWriter 01:40, October 29, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the data! i
Sorry if I must leave a brief message but its pretty late, but thank you! I'm going to get to work using all the info you gave me, but a quick questions:

1. What do you think about the military bases? Should they be nuked? Sorry to sound like a roleplayer but I just wanted a second opinion.

Again thanks! Arstar 03:55, November 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * Bases are not necessarily targets. Each one needs to be evaluated for its strategic importance.  However, a good rule of thumb is that air bases are especially vulnerable (due to there ability to deploy forces quickly).  Other bases (like naval bases) are also tempting due to the access to supply ships and such.  If the enemy can disrupt the infrastructure (main transportation and communication hubs) the civilian population stands a better chance of not being bombed.


 * However, given any warning at all, the best advice is "get out of the city"! Power plants are lower on the list, but always to be considered in an all out attack.  With ICBM's, though, these are to scattered to expect precision.  Some, though, are important enough to send multiple missiles and/or warheads to make sure of a direct hit. SouthWriter 04:19, November 3, 2010 (UTC)

Guidance
A war on plausibility is looming on the horizon, you must know what article I am referring to.

Could you give me advice, on how to still voice my opinions/objections without taking a full-scale part in this war? Arstar 01:21, November 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * You already have.--Sunkist- 02:04, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

I just read through what Arstar and LG were getting at, Sunkist, and it seems that they disagree that Hoosiers have what it takes to be unified like Easterners (like DelMarva, for instance) might have with nukes in their midst. Arstar, I think you have been too involved with the article already -- having edited it extensively and then pulled back, giving up. And now, when it has been reinstated as a proposal, you start in on it again.

You ask for my advice, but then did not wait around for it. It looks like LG was the one in the heat of the argument, but still, you two did not give Sunkist a chance to breath. The discussion looks like it was almost "live" as the three of you went at it. I was there at the beginnig, asking LG to calm down and give Astar some breathing room here. That didn't happen. You and LG have too much at stake with Superior, I think, to actually be fair to Sunkist. Superior got too big too fast due to its isolation from the destruction to the south. And now you two are coming down on Sunkist to make a competitor out of his "homeland." You have voiced your opinions, and that should be it -- you don't have to defend them over and over. As LG counsels Sunkist, so I counsel you, step back and take a break from this. Work on your own articles rather than police the activities of others. It is a whole lot more productive. SouthWriter 15:57, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

A message of great importance
South, for a long time I have respected you; you're wise, clever, and helped restore my faith in Jesus.

I wish I was here to talk about Jesus, but I'm not. I'm here to talk about war. South, as the weeks progressed, I have become more and more upset with the lack of maneverability the new skin has caused, but also the sudden influx of 'n00bs' who don't know the first thing about editing, and are just typing away, the word ramifications not in their minds. I haven't long South; I have many more people to contact, but you deserve more of an explanation, so here's this;

I.. .I. ..

Who would do this? Who would make an Althistory like this? Worsening what was already the worst tragedy in American history? Curse my vivid imagination; I can see myself there, amongst the dead and the dying. ..

'Tis truly a horrifying sight.

For a time, I have been silent.

But I can hold my feelings no longer! It may just be the new skin, or it may be a sudden influx of stupid people, but the way I see our AH wiki. . .OUR wiki, which belonged to the people, has been sucked up, into some sort alien spaceship, never to be seen again! And now we have THIS, this monstrosity! Sic Semper Tyrannis! I knew we couldn't trust them! For too long we ate out of their hands, lulled into a false sense of security! And now they rip the rug out from under us! We have given them Leeway, and we have put up with the many things gone wrong since the new skin was instated, but I say neigh!

I say we give those rabscallions one week to meet our demands, or we will move off, off to the AWA!

Who is with me? A call to arms I say! Who shall join me in this rebellion? In this taking up arms against our oppressors! Agains all the evil of all the lands! *takes in big breath, begins shouting* WE SHALL STORM INTO THE HALLS OF WIKIA, AND DEEMAND OUR FREEDOM! WE WILL NO LONGER EAT CAKE, BUT REJOICE WITH PIE! WE SHALL SHOW THEM WHAT FOR! WE! SHALL! BE! FREE!

Some of you may be against me, some of you will be saying

"Jazon! This is too far, too much! We cannot abandon Wikia after they have broken our legs" And I would say

"Go on! Stay here and fight with your loyalist brothers! I am not here to stop you! I am here to free the others!" Some will say

"Jazon, a week is too short a time, surely we can be more patient!" And I would say

"Go and join your loyalist friends! If you are not with me, you are against me! One week I say, and not a second more!"

Even if I have to do it myself, if I have to I will have a navy of rowboats! An army of bicycles! An air force of one hot air balloon being pulled by a pestered Pachyderm!

So I say again! Those devils in Wikia will not stand a week from now! Who will join my cause? Or must I go Benidect Arnold upon them?

That is all.

We need your help South.

Jazon Naparleon 04:36, November 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * First, thank you for your compliments, Jazon. I have also had problems with getting around in the new platform. Formatting is a bit cramped, with intrusive advertizing of other sites and all that. The side bar is too large, and where tabs used to get from talk to page and back we have small buttons and worse, text links. But over reaction is not the answer. We can not blame the new, unexperienced editors for this. That problem has always been with us. The wikipedia is more structured, with higher standards presumedly, than the wikias that attempt to emulate it. The AH wikia is no different. I do not have the time to oversee the thousands of entries that come in, nor does anyone else for that matter. We have no paid staff for that kind of thing.

Thank you for the compliments, South, as an aspiring young writer (I do more than just Althist, you know, I have a novel or two in the works!) Hearing stuff like that brightens my day. Now on to more pressing matters.
 * I love your word pictures, though. You are a skilled writer and deserve a platform you can depend upon. If you can set up an alternate history "club" somewhere, perhaps I will join you in getting it going. Quality writing is hard to find, but worth it when we do find it. Some ideas that come across on the wikia are good, but the editors have very little knowlege of the art of writing. An organized writing club could perhaps provide guidance for such "wannabe" writers. SouthWriter 17:50, November 29, 2010 (UTC)

Wikia and I have reached an agreement of sorts; I've set up my own wikiwhich will be complete within hours, though it will require some fine tuning, I hope to see you there at some point in the future. Vixi perpetuo, Jazon Naparleon 15:40, December 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've signed up. How do you make a new page?  I will poke around for a while, but I won't change anything permanently.  :-)
 * I await further instructions - patiently. SouthWriter 16:48, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Sideways Earth
Sounds interesting and it leaves itself open to a lot of creativity from other editors. I have not read all the articles yet, but when I do I will leave some comments on your talk page. As for attracting new editors, you need to market the TL. Link it on the relevant lists and maybe create a forum/blog posting for it as well. You might also want to check the Experts page to contact other users who might be interested in the TL. Mitro 02:58, December 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice. I'll see if I can get some links up, and I'll do a blog which might get some interest as well. First, though, I'll contact the experts. :-) SouthWriter 03:08, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

It's a very interesting TL and I would like to help out. I haven't had time to read most of the existing history, but I will soon (probably tonight) and I'll post some comments and suggestions. For the moment, though, I do have one suggestion. Keep in mind that the travel time from Scandinavia and "Southern" Russia to Greenland/West America is going to be far shorter than from OTL Europe to OTL Americas. I'm not sure it would have a great effect on colonization, but it's something to remember. BoredMatt 20:12, December 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've done some remeasuring concerning the placement of the equator, and discovered that what I had actually done was put it in place of the prime meridian (my existing maps put the equator lower, but leaves the South Pole at the Galapagos Islands (OTL name, no turtles there in TTL!). That makes the seas off the coast of Norway deep with a warm surface, just like off of OTL west Africa.  This is where the cyclones begin.  The storms off Norway would blow in to the shores of Siberia, making southern "Russia" unlikely to take to sea to explore anyway.


 * The Siberians would certainly know of their cousins that had crossed the Berring Strait, though. The trip from Siberia would most likely be along the coasts.  The Scandinavians would probably have braved the short trip from their southern shores as soon as they had long boats to make the trip.  The tropical conditions on the mainland of southern Eurasia, though, would probably mean less need to migrate. SouthWriter 04:00, December 2, 2010 (UTC)

The forgotten Dakota-US Unification
Hey South. Do you remember when you and Zack were going to have Dakota link up with the US? What ever happened to that plan? I was just wondering because Provisional Dakota is kinda just sitting there, and it'd be cool to see another state get back into the US. Get back when you can,Arstar 01:52, December 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * Get with Zack on it. I "saved" North Dakota from the encroachment of Assiniboia (after LG and Yank came to an agreement. Actually, ND may actually retain a bit more of its "non-Lakota" area now. As far as I am concerned, the two states could remain separate in the new USA, but the present provisional government is probably the way to go. I am hoping for a bit of Nebraska to reach over to the Dakotas so as to be an extension of both the US and the NAU. SouthWriter 04:44, December 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * I worked out a deal with Yank so the Dakotas would be connected, there is a map on this page up a few sections that shows it. I'll work with South on unifying the Dakotas with the USA within the next few days. --Zack 05:14, December 8, 2010 (UTC)

Indiana
As seeing this will never pass, and I will never be able to have my wanted Indiana Republic. I'm wanting to leave Indiana to you, do what you want with it, delete it, edit it. Every once and a while I'll come back and read on the WIkia every once and ahile, but I think I'm done with editing.--Sunkist- 21:54, December 12, 2010 (UTC)

College Ball (Napoleon's World)
Dunno how much you follow college football in the real world, but I'm doing a poll of all the different users I regularly talk to on here to see who they'd like to see win the different bowl games this season in the Napoleon's World TL. Whoever gets the most votes wins! Thanks!
 * National Championship at the Sugar Bowl: #1 Huron Highlanders (13-0) vs. #2 Nova Scotia Sea Lions (12-0)
 * Texas Bowl: #4 LSU Tigers (12-1) vs. #10 Washington Huskies (10-2)
 * Rose Bowl: #3 Pacifica Orcas (12-1) vs. #8 Indiana Hoosiers (11-2)
 * Silver Bowl: #5 Kahokia Thundering Herd (11-1) vs. #9 South Carolina Gamecocks (10-2)
 * Orange Bowl: #6 Cuba Spaniards (12-1) vs. #14 Northern Apachia Billy Goats (11-1)
 * Peach Bowl: #20 Mississippi Falcons (9-4) vs. #17 Maryland Terrapins (9-4)
 * Manhattan Bowl: #7 Eastern New York Flying Dutchmen (11-1) vs. #18 Missouri Tigers (9-3)
 * Paradise Bowl: #11 Florida State Seminoles (10-2) vs. #22 USC Trojans (8-4)
 * Chicago Bowl: #12 Michigan State Spartans (10-2) vs. #21 Alabama Crimson Tide (8-4)
 * Citrus Bowl: #13 Nebraska Cornhuskers (10-2) vs. #15 Massachusetts Minutemen (10-2)

KingSweden 20:25, December 20, 2010 (UTC)

West Florida
HEy South. Do you have any ideas on what should come out of the western Florida/Panhandle area? Arstar 21:14, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

Western Florida, Winneconne, and other things
Hey South, since you've been vocal on some of the following things I've wanted to ask you for your opinion on them.

Firstly, do you think there's any communities out of western Florida that are worth mentioning? Nothing to make an article about, but something I could mention on the Republic of Florida page. Arstar 21:36, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

Also, what's your opinion to my solution to the Winneconne issue? Zack responded pretty coldly on the main 83dd talk page, and I know it might not have been the best solution, but it seemed logical since it would be unfair to allow one not-so-bombed area to survive in the form of multiple states and have another one be mostly barren. But to mark an article obsolete just because it was not mentioned in another article wouldn't be fair. I know you will respond saying we did the same thing with Indiana but also remember that I tried saving Indiana too, in the form of a smaller nation. Besides, look up Winneconne and you will see how small it is, even though in the ATL it controls adjacent city of Oshkosh.

Lastly, you must have seen the responses Zack posted when I told him to remove the talk page post he posted on the main page. I'm not tattle-taling or being a whiner but he was a little too harsh with a tad of half truths and whatnots. I know I've been a stone in the sand before but he's basically used everything I've done ever to antagonize me. I'm getting off topic....but, what I meant to ask you is that do you think he has the right to post that message on the main talk page? Arstar 21:36, December 23, 2010 (UTC)

Anon "68"
At this point south, its getting a touch old, in either case. The Superior articles last night, and editing the obsolete ones today.... whoever it is doesn't get how things work, at all. The North Georgia edits even contradicted what was already there, lol.

I realize that it's not technically vandalism to the obsolete ones, but.... the guy keeps doing it. While its not really wrong, its not really right either.

If nothing else, I hope a ban will draw them into the open - and the next time, after I get to bed, that I see it, I'll give them a short one. Hopefully do some good.

Lordganon 10:51, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

TSPTF Call Out
Hi. If you are receiving this message it is because you are a member of the TSPTF, but did not respond to the TSPTF Call Out. If you still consider yourself an active member, please leave a short message on the TSTPF talk page. If you do not feel you can be an active member of the TSTPF, please leave a message at the TSPTF talk page or contact me with your retirement notice. If you do not respond to this message, you will be marked as an inactive member. Thank you for your service to this wiki.

Re: Hawaii
Sorry for the delay. I was working on the chart for the US states, but I got lazy and haven't finished it yet. You can find it here. As for Hawaii, I am thinking it would have become part of the US as to a similar manner to how the did. But both Hawaii and this large Micronesia would be added as states after WWII. Does that help? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 00:31, January 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * That helps a little. It is still unclear as to the dealings with the kingdom of Hawaii in the 19th century, though. If the kingdom continued up through the second world war, the attack on Pearl Harbor may not have been enough to provoke the US into the war. Of course, the US could have a strategic base there by agreement with the king, and perhaps the kingdom would have collapsed during the war (death of royal family, or whatever) and thus annexation in the fifties.


 * If we stick with the scenario of our time line, of course, Hawaii would be taken over in a move to expand which would have been even more needed in this time line. Different players, though, would have to be found to keep this expansionism alive. The chief archetects of taking over Hawaii had been southerners in our time line.


 * As for the question of Barak Obama, as long as Hawaii was "owned" by the US, and his mother was a US citizen going to school there, I suppose he passes as being a US citizen even if Hawaii had not been a state yet. That is, IF he wasn't actually born on his parent's visit 'home' to Kenya. But that is a question not answered yet even in our time line! SouthWriter 19:34, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Re: States of the United States
Oh no! You stole the fun away from me. No, I keed. Thank you very much. So sorry I haven't been active there, but I have now been improving my Russian America timeline. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:42, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

US Atlantic Remnant in Panama
I've added a blurb about the USAR cooperating with the South Americans in the Canal Zone to United States Atlantic Remnant (1983: Doomsday). It's history I added to the Panama Canal page a while ago, but it occurred to me you probably didn't see it. It's an attempt to tie up one loose end in the history. Benkarnell 19:24, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Ben. SouthWriter 20:39, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

No Med Sea
if you want to adopt the page feel free, i've not spent anytime on the page for a while, i've been focusing on my Doomsday pages--Smoggy80 18:09, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

I have other projects as well, 1983DD being a major focus as well. I was sort of just doing Admin duties with a respected member of the althist community. If I have time, I might do something with NMS, but right now, I am working on other things. SouthWriter 19:59, February 23, 2011 (UTC)

Spokane
Jin~ raised a point that we'd missed the base, and that it not being nuked was implausible for a numbers of reasons - namely the situation post-DD in Spokane afterwards, given that if it had survived as a base such a collapse would not have occurred. I noted that a 100kt nuke - raised to 2 by Ben, but no net difference - on the base would allow the city to survive, though damaged.

I realize that it's not mentioned in any articles - though, that war itself is barely touched upon, lol - but it does give us more credibility. I figure it's an easy edit for someone to do at some point to these articles, if they feel it's needed to add it outright, but I suspect it would only really be needed in whatever US state it ends up going to and a war article itself, should one ever be written.

Lordganon 05:59, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Re: TwoAm
Hello there. Sorry that I haven't been around lately, but I have been moving to other interests. Anyway, what has the user added? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 17:35, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

He has been adding really bad Russian articles all around the wiki. He put up basically a basic description of modern Russia on the site that sides with the US over against CS. LG wanted it deleted, but I "saved" it only to have it "vandalized" when I posted the new info of John McCain as the new president (Russia's president saying McCain is not suitable to be president of either of the Americas). I reverted the article back to my original revision of his post (cleaning up some incoherent language to state about the same thing). I just finished a complete NationInfo chart (which doesn't fit due to the width of the flag and seal??). I took the info off the Wikipedia article on Russia. SouthWriter 18:09, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

Proposition
Discussion started by "God Bless the United States of America" - moved to Main Page Talk.

I'm Not Too Familiar with the History of the South...
In my TL, Napoleon's World, one of the underlying premises is that the North and South never engaged in civil war and the slavery issue was settled through compromise over the course of many decades, culminating in an agreement to manumit newborn blacks starting in 1871 while grandfathering existing slaves born before the cutoff, even infant ones. One of the reasons for the South not seceding (or the North, as is also threatened) is a militaristic culture that involves an exorbitantly more powerful federal government than existed in OTL, with the federal government quashing potential secessionist rebellions as well as slave uprisings. The final death knell is that a Southern President - the ficiontal Josiah Marks - encourages Southern states to manumit their slaves on their own terms and create their own unique laws accordingly, as slavery is seen by the 1870's as a dying institution. More info on that at Compromise of 1868 (Napoleon's World). This TL also assumes, but has not been fleshed out in this regard, that the South experienced significantly greater leaves of industrialization and thus a lessened reliance on widespread agriculture than in OTL, and as a side note, the US has annexed Cuba and Puerto Rico as slave states.

However, my question to you is this: I have read somewhere that much of segregation and Jim Crow in the South stemmed from a revanchist attitude in the South related directly to the harsh, overbearing tactics and policies favored by the North during Reconstruction, encouraged by the Radical Republicans to the extent that they nearly impeached a moderate (Andrew Johnson) who opposed them. If there was no Civil War in which the South suffered a tremendous defeat, and in turn no tyrannical enforcement of unpopular Reconstruction measures, and thus in turn likely no rise of the Ku Klux Klan, what would segregation in the South have looked like? If it is true (and I'm obviously assuming here, and why I ask in the first place) that a lot of Jim Crow was tied directly into Southern whites doing to blacks what they felt the North had done to them, would segregation have been like? What would former slaveowners coming to terms with freedmen look like? I have made the assumption that the civil rights movement would have happened earlier than in OTL and likely been less contentious, noticeable or extreme, but as a result would likely have resulted in longer-lasting "invisible inequality" as opposed to outright segregation and subjugation. However, I'm a Seattleite who learned a very Northern-skewed interpretation of the Civil War and Jim Crow, and to make this part of the TL better and, in fact, make it plausible, I need a better understanding of Southern cultural and historical attitudes towards the South. And that is what I need help with.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Regards, KingSweden 19:00, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

Maybe some help
Hey South!

I just wanted to thank you for everything you have done, that was a really kind act. If you every need anything let me know! God Bless the United States of America 21:45, March 17, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, but do you thank that a possible micro nation would be possible in North Carolina in the New Bern Area? God Bless the United States of America 21:34, March 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * No bother at all, GB. Glad to help. I don't mean to be competing with LG, but I know more about the area than he, so here goes. Elizabeth City, NC, has long been a survivor city, mentioned early on as discovered by Brazilians that nevertheless did not report it to anyone else. Originally, this was because most editors assumed almost total annihilation of the US except for scattered towns here or there. That proved not to be a viable assumption and thus, in the fall of 2009, a bunch of "nations" arose in the continental US. Any way, some time later the Outer Banks became a viable state and the discovery of Elizabeth City - and its apparent lack of contact with the nearby survivor state - had to be explained. New Bern would be a town much like Elizabeth City - one of the surviving coastal towns in what is known by some as the "Inner Banks." The two towns are in easy distance by water to the thriving state of Outer Banks, so by now (2011) they would probably have also known of each other.


 * I propose that the Inner Banks be incorporated separately and then in some way with the Outer Banks as a state to perhaps be joined with Blue Ridge as a reconstituted North Carolina. Unlike the former South Carolina, there are no city-states absolutely opposed to rejoining with the US (the city-state of Anderson would want to remain separate). New Bern and Elizabeth City are the "anchor cities" of the Inner Banks at the navigable heads of rivers leading to the Atlantic Ocean. A third town, in between the two, is Washington, NC. Conveniently located behind the seawall which is the Outer Banks, these three towns and others could probably support a thriving community (maybe even as large as your original idea. It is better, of course, to picture this community as coming to know of the Outer Banks early on, and slowly working into some sort of co-operation or even an alliance.
 * Well, I hope that helps a little. SouthWriter 00:59, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I believe I am going to either go with the Inner Banks, or Darien. If there is no chance for Darien to be independent then I will go with the Inner Banks.--God Bless the United States of America 22:32, March 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * I responded over at your talk page. Go with the Inner Banks. I'm here to help if you need it. SouthWriter 22:48, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks south! I will really need help catching up on the history, so if you could help me with that would be good. Also, if a chance for a independent darien is ever available, I would really like to scoop it up.God Bless the United States of America 00:04, March 22, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, but what do you think we be a good name for the article? God Bless the United States of America 05:28, March 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * It's always best to have a short title that clearly identifies the subject. This article is about survivors in the Inner Banks, so call it "Inner Banks." SouthWriter 11:08, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks South! I know I am starting to get annoying asking questions, so I will try to keep this short.My current idea is this; edenton,colerain,plymouth, williamston,windsor, and hertdford unite and form the Republic of Inner Banks. Pop would be around 45,000-70,000, peat mining,farming, and maybe some other stuff would be the economy, some national guardmen, and maybe a few PT boats for defense, and maybe later they could find a beached naval vessel.How does it sound?God Bless the United States of America 00:09, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, I can't verify any of the info right now since I am on a borrowed computer and don't know my way around. I usually pull up the map on Google Earth, and don't want to move around too much in this browser. The economy sounds right, but I don't have any idea about the boats. The naval vehicle, though, would most likely never reach the Inner Banks due to having to get by the Outer Banks. Which brings me to the a co-op with the Outer Banks.
 * That nation sort of serves as a "shield" to all of North Carolina to incoming foreign visitors. Elizabeth City, to the north of the united cities, was "invaded" by Brazilians who somehow got past the barrier islands (in the dark of night?). For the most part, though, the Outer Banks stayed to themselves for years. However, farmland is scarce on the sandy islands, so trade with other survivors would have come pretty early on. Elizabeth City seems to be in league with them, and they are in touch with Bermuda (after that island kingdom came out of its isolateion). SouthWriter 01:20, March 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, I started the article, and I was hoping if you got the chance you could review it.If I have messed up or caused improbability in any way, dont hesitate to change it and let me know. God Bless the United States of America 02:11, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey South,
 * Sorry to bother you once again (If I were you, I would charge for Message Space), but I was wandering if you could find something for me. I had a idea that just popped into my head this afternoon, and I thought it was a good idea. Whats the possiblitiy of Lee Greenwood or Barry White surving doomsday and making it to australia with the APA? I couldnt find out where they were at the time of doomsday, so I was wandering if maybe you knew. Give me a ring when you get this, when your not busy. Thanks?God Bless the United States of America 01:18, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Best I can tell, Greenwood was in either Las Vegas or Nashville (probably the latter) on Doomsday. Both were targets, with Las Vegas receiving at least two, probably three strikes.  Chances are, if he survived he never made it to Australia.  He may have escaped into Kentucky, though.
 * As for White, I am assuming this is the R&B singer, he worked out of Los Angeles as a producer and singer in the 1980's. Los Angeles was a major target and it is doubtful that he would have escaped.  If he did, he may have made it to the Chumash Republic.  As with Greenwood, there is hardly any chance he would have ended up in Australia.  SouthWriter 03:12, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Best I can tell, Greenwood was in either Las Vegas or Nashville (probably the latter) on Doomsday. Both were targets, with Las Vegas receiving at least two, probably three strikes.  Chances are, if he survived he never made it to Australia.  He may have escaped into Kentucky, though.
 * As for White, I am assuming this is the R&B singer, he worked out of Los Angeles as a producer and singer in the 1980's. Los Angeles was a major target and it is doubtful that he would have escaped.  If he did, he may have made it to the Chumash Republic.  As with Greenwood, there is hardly any chance he would have ended up in Australia.  SouthWriter 03:12, March 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * As for White, I am assuming this is the R&B singer, he worked out of Los Angeles as a producer and singer in the 1980's. Los Angeles was a major target and it is doubtful that he would have escaped.  If he did, he may have made it to the Chumash Republic.  As with Greenwood, there is hardly any chance he would have ended up in Australia.  SouthWriter 03:12, March 25, 2011 (UTC)

Your Comments
Well, that all seemed pretty confrontational still, but it is an effort, so I'm willing to go along with it. You're not a person I enjoy squabbling with very much, quite frankly. Responses.....

1. Saying "with all due respect" or the like doesn't change the fact that it was an insult, South, not ever. Word choice South, word choice! The word rhetoric in that manner, while you may not have meant it to be insulting, is. As for the "threatening overtones" you mention, if you insult anyone, you should expect it.

2. That's accusation, and completely unwarranted one. Thus, an insult. You complimenting me in the same paragraph doesn't change the fact.

3. The insult in that paragraph is largely the second number you preach at me. But, the phrase "like it or not" is demanding at and threatening me, and thus is an insult.

"Told" in that context is telling you to quit being insulting. I suppose that means it is "telling" though as far as I'm concerned, telling you to quit insulting me is not "telling" you to do anything that have I have no right to "tell" you to do. Call it poor word choice.

The only thing I have intentionally with regards to holding "authority" over you is with regards to the insulting and telling you to cut it out - I'm sure, however, that there's a few times its gone out there without me intending such, and for those I apologize. Much the same applies to any time where you have felt I have insulted your intelligence, with the only intentional time being comparing you to Caer - which I admit is not true, in retrospect, as you will actually listen to reason usually - and for any other times, I apologize. And for the record, you did question my intelligence on more than one occasion, though I'm sure you didn't notice that.

"Beating a dead horse" was the discussion on the main page, which seems to have inflamed you against me.

I have not once, in my opinion, said that your ideas were "silly" or "nonsense." The closest I came was when I said the idea that everyone would up and suddenly be in favor of the declared USA in the West was in my opinion "kind of silly" as that is definitely what it looked like you were arguing at that point, though subsequent posts got it out that that was not it. If that is what you meant, I apologize.

You have not been acting civilly towards me. Ever since I was blunt - which you viewed as disrespect - in talking to GB - I don't sugar-coat things, I'm afraid - you have been acting like this. Matter of fact, the original insult was on his talk page, where you compared me to Yank and made a very unfair characterization. May not seem like one to you, but to me - and the other Canadian editors, I'm sure - it is one. You probably should treat him better, fyi - given the attitude I always seem to see when you respond to him I'm surprised he hasn't gone after you yet, to be honest.

Open Forum? I will respond to any insults right where they are made, plain and simple. If they are going to be made in public, they can be responded to there as well.

Even when I made a separate, very valid, response, to something completely different from our argument, you set yourself off on me, with no reason. My original post there was nothing more than a response, but you turned it into another argument, and the same can be said to an extent for GB's page as well. I've even tried to end it a couple of times, but to no avail.

As for the brass, I've considered a couple of times over the last few days to actually do that with regards to you. I figure we can agree to disagree overall and be done with the whole matter.

Now, the second post...

South, you're missing that the North Carolina article says that "Scouting expeditions from Blue Ridge in 2009 and 2010 discovered several survivor communities, each numbering in the hundreds, at various points in the interior of North Carolina," and that the flight only found Greenville and Kannapolis. That is what the "accusation" - which really should have been put better by myself - has its basis in, as that's where the list would have come from, not foreign explorers. I freely admit that is is possible that they missed something there, but nothing large at all. That's what the messing with part was about. I've no doubt it would work well, but do you see what I mean now?

The optimistic charge is partly about New Bern, and partly the opinions expressed elsewhere by you about the region and the USA.

I cannot remember where I would have said that the majority of states in North America are stuck in the 19th century for conditions, but I believe it would have been meant as the small states, not the larger ones, and the ones more isolated from the world, to an extent like the new USA. But even the more advanced ones still have limits on their abilities, and aren't completely out of the 19th yet in some regards. I like to think of many of these states as kind of like the world Eric Flint is making in his newer 1632-series novels.

Can't remember where I said the stuff about "New Bern being close enough to be affected by the nukes down stream," but to a point it is definitely right.

Let's just start helping GB and get past all of this.

Lordganon 12:30, March 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, LG. As I entitled the last post it is a truce - we are "past this" as you say. Since this is my talk page, though, a few closing remarks are in order.


 * First, what is an insult:


 * in·sult v. in·sult·ed, in·sult·ing, in·sults. --tr. 1.a. To treat with gross insensitivity, insolence, or contemptuous rudeness. b. To affront or demean. 2. Obsolete. To make an attack on. --intr. Archaic. 1. To behave arrogantly. 2. To give offense; offend. --in·sult (¹n“s¾lt”) n. 1. An offensive action or remark.


 * You can see, LG, where I was a little confused when I was accused of insulting you and others. I meant no rudeness, even in the choice of the word "rhetoric." You were being "blunt," that is rude, to GB. And, as I have seen in many of your remarks, you show some of that rudeness in referring to others as well.


 * Your taking offence at my saying "like it or not" is also baffling. I know I am old and set in my ways, but to be of the opinion that things will continue in such a way no matter what we (you or me, or who ever) might do - that is, "like it or not" - can hardly be considered an insult, much less a threat.


 * As you said about your choice of "what have I told you ..." -- this seems to have come from a 'bad choice of words' on my part. I thank you for pointing out how I inadvertantly offended you. I am sorry for the characterization - stereotype if you will - of Canadians on this wiki. All have different biases, and it takes "outsiders" to see those biases in most cases. It works both ways, of course, as we can see from what happened with the "no man's land" between Superior and French Canada (I'm being lazy and not looking up what everything was called). In that case, what was thought lifeless suddenly was full of survivors, just like in America.


 * My remarks about 19th century America was aimed at the assumption that the conditions immediately after DD - no electricity, no communication, etc. - had continued for a quarter century. You came out against the USA as being in such a state, even now, and not even being worthy of having a president (in a matter of speaking). I appreciate the temperate attitude towards the advances - we can't assume a full return to 1983 levels in all of the large states even - and will take that into account given the perimeters of the time line.


 * However, I'd ask that you also consider that American ingenuity and sense of destiny would not disappear. I was an adult when the events of DD were averted in real life. I was living in the midst of the "Reagan Revolution" and know the spirit of the times. I was not "living the American dream" as yet, for we were struggling with two young children still in diapers in a rented house. As such, in fact, we knew how to "make do or do without." That is where I am coming from, LG. If you haven't already seen it, go to the "Honorary citizens" page of the DD wiki. I am the one with the picture next to the bio.


 * And so, LG, I leave you with that. I will try not to take offense with you if you will, in turn, not so take offense with me. And, please, if I do offend you in any way, come to my talk page and let me know. As the saying goes, let's not "air our dirty laundry" in public. I wish you and your family a blessed day. SouthWriter 15:55, March 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * Can do. Lordganon 18:07, March 24, 2011 (UTC)

Hey South Writer I would like for you to help me in a brand new project about a Greek Industrial Revolution Check it out:

Annos ferrumque et ignes

Thank you,

Alexanders 02:46, March 25, 2011 (UTC)

Question
Hey South,

I have been thinking about this a today, and I wanted to ask you. I just don't get why so many people on here don't want the USA to make a comeback.We have the USSR, which is well known to have made many human rights violations, yet they refuse to have the United States come back, even though the US is the bastion of Freedom and Democracy. This doesn't make since at all to me, I understand that there are Communists in this timeline, but shouldn't they leave there objections, which are based on Political idealogy outside the timeline? I know I have many times over brought mine into my articles, but I would gladly take it out, in favor of making a Democratic and Free USA. I hope when you get the time you can message me back. God Bless the United States of America 03:47, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Hi, GB. I wish there was an easy way to message you about this, but unless you join the FB page, this is public domain. If you are able (I know some filters keep young users away from social networking), join the FB page and I can message you there. Until then, I will keep this short.

The premise of this time line was originally that the entire northern hemisphere had been carpet bombed with megatons of nukes hitting every population center bigger than your local county seat (and some of those!). By a miracle, the president and vice president both escaped to begin all over again and it didn't work. Tiny pockets of survivors were all that was expected. Of course, that is far from what the American editors envisioned. And we proved our point with figures, building states "everywhere."

I am not sure what you mean by "Communists in this time line." If you mean that we have Communist editors, I think that is an unfair accessment. There are quire a few liberals, and a few atheists/agnostics, but no out-and-out communists that I am aware of. However, you cannot hope to mold your vision for a nation like we have in real life out of this post-apocolyptic time line. It is not going to happen for a variety of reasons. The main reason is the creativity of the editors involved. There is no way any of us can begin to guess all the twists and turns of the myriad of changes in just one town, much less the whole earth! We create, instead, a piece of fiction that hopefully is enlightening as to the truths and consequences of our everyday lives. SouthWriter 04:13, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks South

Well I joined the FB page, thanks for letting me know about its existence. As for my comment about "Communists" I didnt mean out in out, I primarily meant with people who identfy themselves with some of its aspects and since they live with them, they reject a restored US because of these aspects.God Bless the United States of America 04:52, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

South

I just started my own wiki, and thought I would give you a Invitation to come over. It is called Divergent History Wiki, so come on over when you get the chance. God Bless the United States of America 07:32, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the welcome!

Can you read my article Empire of the White Falcon first 100 years, I would like some opinions on it please, thank you. -- Alexanders

It has many grammical mistakes yes, but it is not part of A Different History it used to be, but I withdrew it from the project.Alexanders 21:32, April 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * I really wish you'd post with the discussion. :-)


 * Anyway, the naming convention still stands. The "portal" page to the time line need not have the time line in parentheses, but all others should refer back to it like this: Page Name (Time Line Title). Grammar is one thing spell checkers can't catch. A good proof reader is needed there. SouthWriter 21:50, April 3, 2011 (UTC)

Elizabeth City
I want to say I took the Brazil idea off something I found elsewhere on the 1983:DD Wiki when I first wrote up the WCRB article, but I'm honestly not for certain. If I 'made it up', it was because I needed to explain why Elizabeth City was not discovered by the outside world until the late 2000s.

I need to clarify something else, too. Everything we do here is made up, but based on what has been established as canon. When I wrote the WCRB south article, I wrote it with two things in mind: canon as it was at the time, and the thinking at the time by the majority of the participating editors (Louisiannan, BenKarnell, et al) that America was by and large a desolate wasteland.

Since then, as you know, a majority of newer editors have believed that this would not be the case. Whatever we wrote up, we worked within canon. And this is what we should do here. Canon states the situation with Elizabeth City and Brazil, and any newer article needs to take that into account. My observation of the WCRB article may be helpful here: I originally intended it to be 100 percent authoritative, but as things changed with various editors' contributions, I now see it as a dated document, existing within the timeline itself, written by explorers with limited resources and subject to whatever the locals either believed to be the truth or wanted them to think was the truth. That, IMO, is the best way to view the WCRB article.

Therefore, we need to find a way to make the Brazil thing workable, perhaps by expanding the reference to Elizabeth City to include Outer Banks. We can write this into the history of the Brazil and Outer Banks articles. Leave the WCRB article as is; we can always write an addendum to it, postdated 2010 or 2011, explaining the inadequacies of the explorers' efforts. --BrianD 16:52, April 4, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. I am responding here without referring to my note to you elsewhere (a bother which this format gives me all the time), so if I misrepresent what I said there, please forgive me.  I understand the authoritative nature of the report - and the limitations you were under when you wrote it.  I used that report myself as a guide to write the Piedmont and Peedee Nation articles.  The rivers of South Carolina gave us an out as to why the explorers found so little.


 * However, with Elizabeth City, we have to assume that the Brazilians were not official representatives of the regime back in Brazil. Also, we have to build in some plot twist that the Bankers did not notice the comings and goings of the Brazilians in 2002.  I will remove the development of the dam in favor of the airship manufacturing plant.  The expansion inland, even, need not be on the schedule that it now is.  I developed that from the original anyway.  That expansion, given the earlier reference to the Brazilians, would not have worked any way.  Instead, the interior of Dare County (rich farmland with very few people in 1983 or now) would be the extent of the expansion.


 * The approach into the inner passage would have been between Portsmouth and Ocracoke Islands. Both are sparsely populated and the distance between them is over two miles.  The problem would be going under the bridge connecting the Outer Banks to the rest of Dare County.  This bridge, the William B. Umstead Memorial Bridge (on Google Earth labeled simply as Manns Harbor Bridge in deference to the new Virginia Dare Bridge built between 1996 and 2002 in our time line) spans 2.8 miles over Manns Harbor.  It is sufficiently high (from the photos I have seen) and apparently allows navigation underneath. By 2002 -- 19 years! -- there probably would have been little concern to guard this bridge, for there was sufficient land between the Inner Banks and the farmland of Dare County.  A nighttime passage by the Brazilians could have gone unnoticed.  Subsequent travel, though, would also have to be at night.


 * That all being taken into account, it looks like a period of Brazilian interference would be unnecessary. They may have exited the area quietly via the Oregon Inlet (the bridge there obviously is raised to allow large ships) between Off Island and Goat Island on their way up the coast.  Being independent explorers, they may never have officially reported to the regime in Brazil.  Perhaps the people in Elizabeth City deliberately misled the Brazilians into avoiding the Outer Banks as a way of preserving their own dependence on the islands for their connections with the rest of the world. EC apparently could have preferred the quiet life with plenty of resources.  If the OB used the ample farmland in mainland Dare County, the nation-state could sustain itself and enjoy trade with Elizabeth City and the Inner Banks nation-state.  These are mostly conservative southerners we're talking about, right?  With no federal government in the way, who knows what co-operation might have ensued in two decades!  SouthWriter 18:54, April 4, 2011 (UTC)

Castellón
Sorry to put you on the spot, but we clearly have a problematic situation here. I don't blame the community, because I'm not one for intervening on articles outside my "zone of interest." But I'm becoming increasingly worried about the exponentially increasing size of the arguments on the Castellon article, and I find it is detracting from my time in other areas of life. This may sound unrealistic, but I am also concerned with the time User:Lordganon is spending, because I hate to waste an hour out of someone's 24-hour day. I really want to just get this over with so I can resume my normal life. Additionally, I have a ton of stubs on 1983: Doomsday, A Different History, and my own timeline that needs to be finished, so I really just want to have enough time to contribute. Naturally, it would be a shame for the article not to be canonized because of all the time spent on arguing, but if it's obsolete, it's obsolete. What I ask from you is to let me know which of mine and LG's arguments are valid to avoid the arguments growing excessively large, put forth your own ideas and propose a compromise if necessary. I would greatly appreciate it! Thanks for your time! Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:30, April 6, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again. The motive was because Peru is a large importer of wheat, and thus would greatly benefit Peru. It would also keep Argentina and the ANZC from having all the world's wheat. The reason Spain was chosen was because 1) Mexico is sovereign and powerful, and 2) most of the wheat-producing US is inland. Spain is the only Spanish-speaking country that is screwed up majorly besides maybe Equatorial Guinea. Peru could use the profits gained from producing its own wheat to improve its image in the world. Castellon in particular was chosen because its population is largely intact, but severely weakened. Would you say if I convincingly found a motive, my article would be valid with only minor tweaks? Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 21:54, April 6, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, if LG sees this -- and I am pretty sure he will :-) -- you have just confirmed his "imperialism" charge. A couple of things have to be considered. First, how would they know about the condition of the Castello province? It is over 6800 miles away via the Panama Canal and would represent a big gamble even if it was attempted. As I said on your talk page (have I mentioned how rather confusing this is having the discussion in divided venues?), it is possible for Castellon to exist but not as a Peruvian protectorate/colony. It is too far away to be practical. In trying to weaken the area to be ripe for conquest (albeit through humanitarian assistance) you destroyed your chances on this one. If you want to reconsider the city-state (could enlarge to a 'nation-state' to include the whole Castello province) that against all odds succeeds, then it can work. The fishing industry (not rivers and reservoirs, but as in Peru, deep sea fishing) will become the key. Fish will serve both as food and fertilizer and wheat, maize, potatoes and oats will all have to be cultivated in, among, and beyond the forests lining the mountains around Castellon. Peru, meanwhile, will leave empire building to the USSR. SouthWriter 01:34, April 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * Wait what do you mean "confirmed?" Keep in mind Peru's been communicating with China for a while and has built up its naval capabilities because of it. Whether or not it is imperialism is irrelevant though. The question is whether when it was brought up to SAC, would SAC approve it as a means of restarting the Spanish economy and providing humanitarian aid. Because it also serves the dual purpose of fixing the wheat trade, it helps everyone. Don't forget the small elements of corruption in every country that would rather have lower wheat prices. True, it's a gamble, but if it fails, Peru has a greater image in the world, and once Spain gets off the ground it will reach out to SAC as having helped it. Like I don't see why this a) doesn't help everyone and b) it is unprofitable for SAC and Peru. Also, one thing I haven't mentioned is that this isn't meant to be permanent. Once the Republic of Spain is set up as a stable and prosperous state with friendly trading relations, Peru intends to give it back. Sorry to spam your talk page but I want to get this cleared up.

Btw this is random, but how can Peru get into Japan? Naturally ATL Peru and Japan are like best friends because of Fujimori, but Japan is totally isolated. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:01, April 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * I meant that your talk of taking advantage of Castellon in its weakened condition is quite imperialistic. You are right, though, about moving into the realm of co-operation within the SAC for such overseas ventures. Spain would be able to produce potato and grains in abundance if it were to be restored to its former cohesion. However, if this is a temporary protectorate, with an aim toward future trade in such produce to the advantage of all of the SAC, then why not just foster a relationship with Mexico and Texas? There is not a state of war, and having a trade agreement with neighbors is a lot easier than creating an ally half-way around the world.


 * As for Japan, it is not isolationist now in TTL. It hasn't been since 2004. The prestige of Peru would be much more enhanced by providing true humanitarian aid there than to deal with nation building on the Iberian Peninsula. It would not have the advantage of building a resource, but it would most definitely build respect. The success of Fujimora in TTL may well have added to the friendship between Peru and Japan, leading to renewed diplomatic relations when Japan opened in his last year in power. Since then, in fact, Peru would be the main mediator between Asia and the SAC. Connections with the Chinese survivor nation of Jiangsu should be a big plus in the wheat and other grains markets. With Jiangsu opening up its markets to the world, the markets in the ANZC (Australia and, in the case of rice and maize Malaysia and the Philippines), have major competition. The need to actually control an area politically pales in comparison to open markets that keep the prices low. SouthWriter 16:34, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

Well for one, Peru and Spain are like good friends. Spain has invested a lot of money in Peru, so isn't it moral that Peru pays them back? Also, half of Peruvians have brethren in Spain. It's a simple reason. Naturally someone would be looking for a way to fix the wheat problem. Also, it would help Peru become less dependent on Argentina for wheat. Not only that, but it improves relations. If Peru does not do this, they are forced to a) provide massive humanitarian aid to Spain at no profit except future relations, b) force countries like Jiangsu and Texas to export wheat to SAC when they hardly have enough for themselves, and c) convert some of its own lands that are meant to grow potatoes into wheat growing ones. Could not all these problems be solved easily with Castellón?

Okay. I'll try to incorporate massive refugees from Japan as well as China beginning around 2006. Also, I don't think Peru would invest in a socialist nation like Jiangsu. The OTL/ATL story/fact that Alan Garcia killed two Peruvian currencies in 1985-1990 and Fujimori was elected and the last second and saved Peru would penetrate enough to cause a massive dislike for socialism. Also, look at the Peruvian polls for the upcoming election, and you can observe that of the five possible candidates, only one can be considered left-wing. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:17, April 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * You should drop the Hispanic brotherhood thing with Spain, it is not feasable. You may be right about past investment in Peru, but if you are referring to the colonization period I don't thing that counts. There is no reason why there need be any "humanitarian aid" to Spain from Peru by itself. I can see the SAC as a whole doing so -- and not for "profit," that's the whole idea of humanitarian aid!


 * There is no "wheat problem" apart from having more options, which is why I mentioned Mexico and Texas and even Jiangsu. Taiwan would also be a source as they are claiming more of the mainland. However, Jiangsu is not strictly a socialist state. I would doubt if there ecclectic system is any more "socialist" than pre-DD Spain or France was. Buying wheat is not "investing" in a foreign country, it is simply doing business. The US in OTL trades with the PRC, even though it abhors its communism. Its simple economics.


 * No nation is "forced" to trade with another, for there must always be some profit in the trade. Importers and exporters would not be in the business if they were not paid. There is plenty of land not cultivated on the slopes of the Andes and the rainforests. Peru could easily convert such land to farmland if there was too much of a need. However, the SAC has far more land together than is needed to force one of its members to go elsewhere - or produce in house.


 * Your infatuation with Fujimori for saving Peru's economy is understandable, but you have brushed over the crimes which he committed along the way in OTL. The article even mentions some of the charges, but assumes any irregularities were justified (or that the charges were trumped up). SouthWriter 02:37, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

My main argument is that 23% of foreign investment in Peru is Spanish. Is Peru just going to get away with all that money? Also, I don't really see the problem with this. Peru benefits, Spain benefits, the Castellonians benefit, and SAC benefits.

Name one instance where a resource exists in only one or two countries and does not cause conflict.

When I said force, I was being a little sarcastic. I don't think a significant amount of wheat could come out of Texas to feed a whole continent.

Yeah but the Americans don't hate socialism on the level of the Peruvians. Also, I wouldn't consider the PRC socialist. They have stable growth and are embracing the free market.

The reason I chose to have a "free trade zone" instead of giving money directly to Spain is because if you have a free trade zone, you know you will get the money you put into it back, because whatever you give, you get back an equal price. However, if you give your money to another country, you can't guarantee it back. If Spain could pour a good percentage of its wheat into Castellon, Peru could in return provide modern machinery to make Spain self-sufficient. Everyone wins.

I admit I'm a little hyped up over the upcoming election, but keep in mind a couple of things. One of Fuji's main mistakes was appointing corrupt individuals to his cabinet. He wasn't corrupt, it was mostly his cabinet. Vladimiro Montesinos was killed in the US, so that would already increase his popularity greatly, and many events involving military suppression would be avoided. The rest is mostly smearing. Peruvian politics is mostly smearing. I hear a lot about Ollanta Humala and Alejandro Toledo that may or may not be true. But most people stick it to him that he was a criminal for supporting contraception. Maybe he was trying to do too much by completely saving the economy get rid of terrorists, crackdown on drug cartels, and prevent population growth at the same time, I'm not the one to judge, but he saved the lives of millions of Peruvians from the Shining Path, so I don't really see what's the hype. Politics aside, in TTL, people would have stronger distrust towards socialism as a worthwile investment. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 03:56, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me for spamming your talk page again, but I was wondering what you thought of the proposal for a compromise on the page. No one except LG's responded yet. I don't take back any of my arguments, but I figure this would come to a nicer ending if the community collaborated. Thanks! Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:29, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Intervention would be appreciated… LG's trying to tell me the SR is a Catalan State even though from my research the only city that's Catalan-speaking is Alicante… Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:01, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

And if he had actually read what I told him, he'd have seen that it is prior to the Murcia regions joining it. Not the first time I've had that problem with him. Lordganon 04:30, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, I'm not trying to oppose you or anything. I just can't find anything that says they were Catalan on any existing pages. After all, the only surviving Catalan communities south of Andorra were Alicante and Castellon, right? If you would link me it would be great. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:11, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you look at the makeup of the islands that they make up of. It's not Castillian at all. And the Canaries residents aren't either way, and would go along with things. Thus, the Balearics, and their Catalan culture would dominate. Seriously, Kenny. And it is the Pais del Oro, the predecessor of the SR that I am telling you is, and I've said so several times. Not that you have noticed. If you've another issue, or response, take it to my page. I'm cluttering up south's page any further - and neither will you - because you don't read entire sentences.

Apologies for this being put here in the first place, South. Like I said, not the first time he's done it, you only need look at Collie's page for that proof.

Lordganon 06:57, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * LG, you know by now that I would prefer a discussion be in one place with questions answered "in line." That being said, I wish that you would refrain from showing such disrespect to the young man in a public forum. If you must speak in such a tone, keep it on either your talk page or the other party's talk page. I know, those places are also "public," but at least they keep in between the two who are in disagreement.


 * It appears that I may have disregarded Kenny's communication of April 16, so I will take this opportunity to apologize. It appears that there has been only one person "riding" this article, and that is LG. However, he is a senior administrator and nothing gets past into "canon" without some consensus to its viability. The constant back and forth with LG is not advancing the goal. Kenny, you have not succeeded in creating a quiet and reasonable city-state to the satisfaction of the community. Because of this, though I admire your scholarship, I would suggest that you abandon this project in its current form. Apart from a response early on from Ben (in which he counseled against the article), this has been Kenny vs. LG with a little mediation from yours truly. It is getting nowhere. SouthWriter 19:36, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Here's a question. Would it violate canon to have Castellón as a free trade zone of the RoS/Spanish Republic? A lot of the "implausibility" came from my trying to keep it independent. I'd like to put this off for awhile, but I am not going to break my promise to myself to not do any other timelines until I finished Castellón, Pearl River Delta, Andean areas on DD. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 19:56, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * You are correct, the idea of an independent state is very difficult to maintain. The "free trade zone" might work, as long as it does not assume too much. If you want it to pass as a simple survivor city, scale it back unless you can find some reason why the world would take notice of it over other surviving port cities on the Mediterranean. SouthWriter 20:05, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

South, I meant that whenever he doesn't notice something like that/read things throughly, he comes running to you instead of discussing it with me. He's done that everywhere that we have such disputes because of it, like with the Map Game and Collie, for instance. Like I said, it's not the first time. I simply told him to actually talk to me about it instead of running off to you next time, and to not clutter up your page any further until you responded.

Though, thank you for the meditation and sense.

Lordganon 02:35, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll do my best on the Free Trade Zone. Finals week is approaching so I may have to put it off until summer. Basically I'll keep everything the same before Spanish Intervention, except Spain decides to make Castellón a Free Trade Zone, and funnel money in that way.

@LG it's a bit immature, I fully accept that, and I consider that whenever I am about to do it, but it's never failed to shine at least some light on the subject at hand. Arguing just gets the argument nowhere. Like if I had countered your point on Catalan by explaining how the Spanish Republic wasn't descended from the PdOr, it would just explode into another argument, but thanks to a third party, that argument is now irrelevant because there's a new constructive solution being discussed.

And I've apologized to SW already at least twice, it's kind of unnecessary for someone else to be apologizing for me, but I appreciate the thought… Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:39, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the SR is descended from the PdOr, mostly. I suggest you actually read the history and all the references in the news pages. At any rate, not getting into an argument with you here.

Thank you for the help in dealing with him, once again, South.

Lordganon 09:28, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I really appreciate your time and effort to get this thing graduated. Once I finish the other sections, I'll put it up for canonization. Thanks again! Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 21:53, May 24, 2011 (UTC)

Any further problems before I put it up on the 1983DD talk page? Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 02:31, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

I assume that you mean propose that it the article be graduated from "proposal" under the discussion there. Of course, you will want to put a link to the discussion on the Castellón talk page to allow a full understanding to the larger community. Unfortunately, LG biased just about everyone from the beginning on this one. Once those interested in the article get a chance to review the data, and then read the article as it has come to be, an informed consensus can be reached. Personally, I support the article. SouthWriter 02:52, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

I think if we're going to get this checked off, we need a fourth opinion. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 01:27, June 13, 2011 (UTC)


 * We can't do much more than we have so far. I have put a message up on LG's page, stating my opinion. I don't know how much I can do as a co-member of the "Brass" with this, but I will message Brian and see if he can get a word in edgewise. SouthWriter 04:36, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

You don't know how much I appreciate your help. It's one of the few things that's left me hope for contributing to the timeline. Thanks again. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:43, June 13, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, LG doesn't like it very much, and he was nice enough to nominate me to join him at the 'top.' He considers my intervention as 'arguing' with him.   I am all for new articles in the time line, even though many editors have more or less decided that every place that can be written about has been written about.  I hope that Brian can make some sense out of the long line of arguments on the article talk page.  Perhaps his 'fourth voice" will either settle the matter of present a different angle which we have missed.  Either way, I am sure that we can get this graduated soon. SouthWriter 00:38, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

SouthWriter i would like to say
SouthWriter i Would like to say woul like you to call me Taurus.I would also like say that the reason I have not contributed much is that i,ve been low on ideas.So I would love some help with a New Humanity. Empire1994 00:58, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

Something that should have been done a while ago.
Hey South

I have been meaning to do this for a while, but I have never apologized for putting you into the Position of having to defend me. I should have kept my opinion to myself, instead of leaving you in the spotlight.I apologize for that.I would also like to thank you for helping me since I came here, you have been a great tutor for me.I thank you for everything. God Bless the United States of America 22:22, April 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, GB. No apology needed, I have the "rank" of Lieutenant on the wiki, and that means I have a responsibility to stand up for the little guy, especially when another admin seems to be treating that little guy shabbily. Note to eavesdroppers: I said "seems" -- a matter of opinion on my OWN talk page, okay?


 * And you're are certainly welcome for the compliment. I sort of jumped right into the fray in Nov. of 2009, but I am not a novice when it comes to writing OR to dealing with people.  I was nominated and accepted the admin position and try to help out when I can.  SouthWriter 23:05, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

SouthWriter it does not matter
SouthWriter It does not matter really what the nickname is.Empire1994 00:51, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

Hay South
Hay South, It's me emp what do you think of the New Humanity disastor being biologicalEmpire1994 01:08, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Emp. I think you meant "Hey" :-)

Anyway, yeah, biological makes the best sense. An isolated population, on an island somewhere, can survive a global catastrophe like that. My first thought would be the scientific community in Antarctica, though that may not give a large enough gene pool. I like Antartica because the harsh conditions there, and the isoloation, leave it unlikely for a pandemic to reach them -- especially if the virus is airborne and fast acting. SouthWriter 01:31, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Blue Mars
Hi. I saw that someone removed the future events on the Blue Mars page. I was a major contributor to that timeline, and I am unhappy that it was removed. I added it back, but it was reverted by you. Just wondering, have you seen timelines that increased the technological advancement of Earth? Hopefully, yes. These timelines essentially are able to go as many 0 years as they want into the future, whether that be 10, 20, 50, 100, or 1000 years. However, due to their increased technological advancement, they are able to extend their timeline where timelines with normal technological advancement hit an imaginary wall of time where they MUST stop writing their alternative history. For the other group of althistory writers, they may go as far into the future (technically) as they would like, since their 2011 is far in the past. Please put back the rest of the Blue Mars timeline. There is nothing wrong with going into the future. In addition, why does it matter? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 18:18, April 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * This wiki is NOT "other groups," it has rules that do not allow future history for articles. It's in the guidelines. If an alternate history changes greatly in the past, so as to allow scientific advances beyond our own, that time line STILL ceases to be "history" when it goes into the future. I saved this excellent time line from being deleted or made obsolete. To cover the future, except as science fiction, is not alternative history. There are venues for science fiction, but this is not one of them. SouthWriter 19:22, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Go to http://future.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page and continue your timeline with a link back to this site. One writer (or more I don't know) did that for his timeline. It could be used easily for you, just watch out as o'er there people are really slow to respond. Bobalugee1940 19:44, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Go to http://future.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page and continue your timeline with a link back to this site. One writer (or more I don't know) did that for his timeline. It could be used easily for you, just watch out as o'er there people are really slow to respond. Bobalugee1940 19:44, April 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * @Bobalugee: I know about future wiki. I go on there from time to time, but there are pretty much 0 active editors, so yeah. ..


 * @SouthWriter: That's not what I meant about the "other groups". I meant "other groups" of history writers. Sorry if that caused confusion. Future history from althistory, with a POD, meeting the guidelines of althistory when still in the past is STILL althistory, even if it goes into the future. It doesn't cease to be an althistory once is passes the imaginary date that is today. Also, alternative history is completely separate from our history after the POD. It does not have to end at the date that is today. Going into the future does not automatically make it "science fiction". No "today" exists in alternative history, except for certain timelines like 1983: Doomsday which are real time. Taking this to the guidelines talk. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 01:04, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

Strikes in the USSR
Several I can confirm as being military locations, or major centers of industry. There's a few besides that which it was based on the population in general, but the principle there was pretty simple: The USSR hit virtually all cities of that size in the USA, so why wouldn't it have been hit more or less the same?

But yeah, I'll work on those maps sometime in the future. Not even close to finishing the strike list though, so....

Lordganon 09:29, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Heh. I've probably tripled that USSR strike list over the last few months, lol. And it'll get worse, which I'm sure you're happy to hear ;) Map will come sometime after that, though to be honest I've barely touched military bases yet, lol.

Much obliged for replying on my page, much easier for me to remember about it, lol.

Lordganon 16:17, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Am I the only one who prefers these "conversations" be on one page? :-)

Anyway, glad to oblige. However, about the destruction, for some reason I had never looked at what the Wikipedia articles say about nuclear yield and effects of individual warheads. So, in looking at a proposal a bit ago, I challenged a "10 kt tactical weapon" and backed it up with the chart to the right (I am sure you'd see it soon, since you categorize every uncategorized picture that goes up!). The article from which that comes lists what US weapons are in active use. SouthWriter 17:56, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Yeah, I saw it before you made the post on the one talk page. Lordganon 05:01, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

Help
Hay SouthWriter could you help me come up with some ideas for a New Humanity.Empire1994 01:21, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

South i like
South I would like to ask you for some ideas on a New HumanityEmpire1994 00:14, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry Emp, but I can't build this for you. Personally, since this is alternate history, any restart of humanity on this scale is unplausible to me since the Bible - yes Bible! - indicates that when that happens next it will be the LAST judgment.

However, if yoiu want to build a new huamnity, I would suggest either an island far removed from the rest of humanity (maybe even Antartica), or a survivalist community in a well stocked underground shelter. The disaster could be a pandemic that is airborne and fast working. The isolated community comes out into the world after a few months (after the natural decay process has 'cleansed') the earth. What automatic systems still working would then be at their access. They would "start over" with the remnants of society, vowing to make sure to 'do better' this time. SouthWriter 18:48, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

Edits
Hey South. Sorry about my edits. I never knew what the "minor edit" checkbox at the bottom of the edit screen did. My mistake, and I'll try to remember to use it in the future. Thanks for the reminder. MAINEiac4434 02:14, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

well here it is
You want a basic timeline well here it is you go for the the year I began it till, the New humanity controls the earth by the year 2000.Empire1994 01:11, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Emp, I am glad you can write a complete for the article (though it might take a few entries) because the above statement is an incredible run-on sentence that is very hard to decipher! From what I gather, the "New Humanity" is not humanity that survives, but rather a humanity that controls. You want to write about a super race that takes over the world in less than 40 years.

However, that does not answer the question as to why you keep feeding the waiting community one phrase at a time. Write out a time line on paper (or as a text document you can edit at your leisure), and then put the whole concept up at one time. Otherwise, no one is going to keep coming back to read you time line. SouthWriter 02:49, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Heh
Last thing you have to worry about, lol And thanks ^^

How'd you feel about a promo of your own? ;)

Lordganon 01:43, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

I suppose you two could use some help with most of the brass retiring and all that. I'll have to think on it -- gotta come up with a good title. SouthWriter 03:06, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Just lemme know when, lol. Or is that saying to start the paperwork now and you'll work on the title? ;) Lordganon 22:39, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Start the paperwork, I'll work on a title. I spend way too much time on here anyway, so a little bit more "authority" won't hurt. SouthWriter 22:43, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Done. All you need to do is accept the nomination. Lordganon 23:16, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid that you need to do that on the request for user rights page, South. Though it is good to hear, lol. Lordganon 04:48, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

South, you might have been
South, you have might have been wanting to know why I do my edits a line at a time well Here is the basic reason for that.I write what I can come up with at that moument and it is usually a line.Oh and i'm sorry for the reply that was hard to understand.I could have made that clearer for you SouthEmpire1994 01:38, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

South i've changed
South i've changed a New Humanity to A Changed World and changed what was there because it was no longer workable the way it was.Empire1994 23:09, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Inca Kola
Hmmm, interesting points. My rationale was this. Inca Kola was purchased by Coca-Cola in 1999 or 2000. Most Peruvians I know have said Inca Kola used to taste much more distinctive before being bought. Now it mostly tastes like bubblegum, because it is said Coca-Cola wanted to standardize, and have bottles of Coke in Peruvian fast food rather than Inca Kola. Obviously they couldn't discontinue Inca Kola, because there would be public outrage, so instead, they decided to make the taste worse in hope of making it lose popularity. Obviously if this is true, it failed completely. However, this is generally accepted by many Peruvians as an explanation. But in TTL, Inca Kola was never bought by Coca-Cola. It's true that Coca-Cola would have regained much popularity, especially since this was before the New Coke failure. However, there are two things to consider: 1) Inca Kola had existing demand throughout SAC, and excellent marketing techniques and 2) Peru has better economic relations with the rest of the world than Cuba. Maybe it would be a stretch to say it replaced Coca-Cola as the universal soft drink, but I would say it would have good markets in, SAC, ANZC, Castellón, Southeast Asia, and limited amounts in China. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:37, May 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't put two and two together about the date of the purchase. I first tasted Inca Kola in 2002, so I suppose that the taste could have been changed, though I was IN Peru when I tasted it, so the local version would have been what I drank.  No one down there told me that the taste had changed, and the missionaries I was with had been there several years already.  I doubt if Coca Cola would change the formula so much as to make it less popular for it had become the national drink - del sabor nacional, the "national flavor"!  The Wikipedia article says nothing about any change of formula, but rather in a prolifiration of competition nationally to displace the "national drink" when it sold out to Coca-Cola (joint ownership and total control being with Inca Kola within Peru).


 * I agree, though, that even with Siberian aid, Cuba would not have as much economic relations as Peru. However, the export of the drink would take a network like Coca-Cola to market it internationally.  In OTL the company was in debt in 1999, which led to the partnership with Coca-Cola, which then marketed Inca Kola elsewhere.  Today only Ecuador and the USA bottles Inca Kola outside of Peru.  In TTL, the company will have to sink or swim in economic uncertainty.  I suggest that perhaps Fujimori might have offered government subsidies to "save Peru's national drink."  Export of the drink could have become a way to present SAC with a visual reminder of the economic strength of Peru.


 * I would say change the reference to Inca Kola becoming a favorite throughout the SAC, and throughout the Mediterranean via the port at Castellón. SouthWriter 15:05, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, that sounds fair. Although once it permeates through SAC, it will likely be bottled throughout the world, though much less popular. Unfortunately I don't really have evidence of taste differences lol. I think the best is from the can or soda fountain rather than from the bottle, and I've had the chance to try both the US and Peruvian versions. But my parents are really uptight about me drinking soda before I get my braces off, so I haven't had either in a while. I can't remember the taste as it was before 2000, but again, I hear it from everybody, Peruvians are very passionate about their Kola. I don't think it would be something they would put on Wikipedia, because it would hurt both Lindley and Coca-cola sales. I didn't find anything on the Spanish article either. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:29, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

Outer Banks
Alright.. sorry for the sudden change, but the Outer Banks had already incoperated other counties into it'self why wouldn't it intergrate the main-land? Alexanders 14:50, May 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, how did this get under "Inca Kola"? :-)


 * Anyway, I put a heading on it. The expansion in the north was due to several bridges connecting to the mainland in the north. The expansion into mainland Dare County was mentioned a paragraph above where you put it. I see no problem expanding to Hyde county, but the others you mentioned are "already taken." The Inner Banks section of the state is being developed by survivors there, so any expansion into those counties will require co-operation. I suspect that it could be accomplished over time, but the result would be a new nation-state with "states" made up of previously established societies. Eventually, I'd hope that North Carolina would be able to re-unite. SouthWriter 15:05, May 25, 2011 (UTC)

When and how do you think it should be united? East Carolina Convention this Summer? Becomes a nation state by 2017? I added to the Outer Banks Period section of the Elizabeth City Article. Alexanders 23:14, May 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, I'd say improved relations come about soon because of increased knowledge of the area by Blue Ridge and its allies. This should lead to a reunification of the whole state in time, so no new nation-state need be started. An East Carolina Alliance is certainly far past due, though. SouthWriter 13:16, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

Long Time No See!
Hey South. Haven't seen you in a while!

I've been doing almost no editing since January, but I've tried to keep tabs on whats happened on 1983DD. While it appears to me that it has stayed roughly the same I've noticed the Celtic Church article is under review, as is the one on the Vatican. Which got me thinking, since the Celts are the most Catholic people in Western Europe, would it be possible for a Celtic to take control of the Catholics? I'm not a Catholic anymore, I've been a Deist since around Febuary, but I attend Catholic-oriented high school and I couldn't help but wonder whats going on with the articles on religion on the timeline.
 * I'd be interested to know what made you turn from a Catholic to a Deist since we last corresponded. Message me through Facebook (you can find me on the little used 1983DD Facebook page).  The Wall message board has a string called "Roll Call" and I'm one of the 1983DD editors identified there. SouthWriter 22:27, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

I've also noticed that you made an article on Protestantism. I know only a handful on the various denominations, but seeing that you are a Presbyterian, what exactly are the differences between mainline Christian teachings? Thanks, Arstar 03:14, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I thought there was far too much information about Catholicism and there needed to be some balance. It is a shame that religious education in the Catholic Church doesn't cover more of us "Separated Brethren" (a term I remember from somewhere) or the "ecclesial communities" (from the article on Protestantism on Wikipedia).  Anyway, here's a quick tour of Christianity comparing them as simply as I can.
 * Catholicism: The worldwide assembly of believers that hold to the Bible and the commentary thereof passed down from the earliest times. The basic doctrines of God - As Creator, Savior, Provider, and Judge - are faithful to the teaching of the Bible as understood from the earliest times.  The doctrines concerning mankind, however, seem to have changed a little as time went on.  All these doctrines, though, have support from the Bible.  Latin thought, going back to the philosophers and politicians of ancient Rome, tend to influence the Church more than either the Greek or the Hebrew thought of the founders.
 * Orthodoxy: Both Eastern and 'Oriental' Orthodoxies are a split from the Roman "Western" church based on differing understanding of some of the early creeds. The basic doctrines of God, though, remain the same.  The Eastern Orthodox churches were especially influenced by Greek thought more than any other.  Greek was the language of the New Testament, so these believers hold that their religion is "closer" than Catholicism.  The other Orthodox communities closely resemble the Eastern church, but are not linked by any ecclesiastical authority structure.
 * Protestantism: This goes back to Martin Luther, mostly, who was a Catholic monk who wanted to reform the Church to save it from the abuse of several of its practices. The main practice he did not like, seeing no support for it in Scripture, was the selling of "indulgences" (redeeming souls from purgatory). To Luther, there were five things that Christians depended on:
 * The Bible alone as the sole written authority. This meant, among other things, that the common man ought to be able to read the Bible in his own language.  This led to his translating the Bible into German even as others had already begun doing in England.
 * Salvation is by God's Grace alone. That is to say, God saves those that He wants to save, not because of anything the saved might do before hand.
 * Only those who believe (trust) God can be saved. This means that those who trust in themselves to get to heaven can not make it by their efforts alone.
 * Salvation is through the work of Christ alone. That is, Jesus died as a sacrifice to pay the 'price' that God's people could not pay that was due of everyone due to the bondage of human nature - selfish dependence upon other things rather than on God.
 * The praise - thanksgiving and 'glory' - for salvation must be to God alone. This is because salvation comes by the will of God and by the work of God's Son (Jesus Christ) and not by anything man can do.


 * That brings us to the Protestant denominations:
 * Lutherans: The original denomination of Protestantism is differentiated from Catholicism by a rejection of the supremacy of any one leader on earth (papacy) and a dependency of the Word of God over against added Tradition. In addition to following the five principles above, Lutherans believe that the presence of Jesus in the elements of the eucharist is along side rather than inside. This is called "consubstantiation" rather than "transubstantiation."  Baptism is to infant, much as in the Catholic Church (but with no indication of saving the child).  Church government is by bishops overseeing pastors.
 * Presbyterians (and Reformed Churches in general): Based largely on the teachings of John Calvin, these churches differ from Lutherans in that they believer the eucharist is an experience of the spiritual presence of Jesus within the assembly of believers. The elements are representative only.  Infant baptism is much the same, though the idea of the family of God (the Covenant) is central to its meaning.  Church government is from the "bottom up" and is a representative form similar to what we have in American politics.  Local churches are 'ruled' by elders, elders are members of presbyteries (groups of local churches) and these presbyteries are grouped into the denominations "General Assembly."
 * Anglicans: When the Catholic Church would not let King Henry XIII divorce his wife, he took advantage of the reformation movement to announce a split. The official Church of England would from then on acknowledge the king rather than the pope.  Form and ceremony did not change much, and the church was ruled from the top down - Archbishops at the top, then bishops and finally local pastors.  Officially, the church became largely Reformed in doctrine with a heavy influence from the Church of Scotland, from which developed Presbyterianism.
 * Methodists: A break away from the Anglicans, this denomination was founded by Charles Wesley, a preacher who was profoundly 'non-Calvinist.' His doctrine was what is called Arminian (after Arminius, a former Calvinist who disagreed on the relationship of Man to God when it came to salvation).  In many ways, Wesley's understanding of how salvation comes about echoes that of many Catholics - that being a sort of teamwork with God.  Church government is much like Anglicism.
 * Baptists: Baptists differ from all the above on the mode and meaning of baptism. While others baptize infants, to a Baptist the ceremony of baptism follows salvation as a sign to the world that one has become a believer.  Doctrinally, Baptist have traditionally been Calvinistic, but in the last century or so most believe much like the Methodists when it comes to salvation. To most Baptists, the eucharist (Lord's Supper) is a memorial service remembering the sacrifice Jesus made for the salvation of His people.  Church government is local for all Baptists - the office of elder is the same as pastor, the role held by elders in Presbyterian churches is usually delegated to the Deacon in Baptist churches.


 * I hope that helps in understanding the differences. If you want to discuss the similarities, send me a message by way of Facebook (see above.)  SouthWriter 22:27, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Cuba as a State...?
Hey South,

I had a question for you regarding what you think a Cuba that had been annexed by the United States in the early 19th century would have looked like, and what effect that would have had on the South as a whole. I've started fleshing it out a bit in the Napoleon's World timeline, but I wanted some outside input before I really dove into it...

Thanks!

KingSweden 05:34, May 28, 2011 (UTC) Assuming (without checking the time line) that Napoleon had conquered Spain and controlled much of Spain's land in the America's (like he did when he took over the Louisanna Territory), it is feasable that he would have controlled Cuba as well. If this was the case, I can see the US wishing to have a buffer to incoming French vessels. I can see General Andrew Jackson, who invaded Florida leading to Spain's departure, would have seen further expansion to Cuba as a good idea as Napoleon was getting stronger.

If Cuba had been like Florida, entering as a state to the US in the 1840's, it would have been a boon to the South. Being so far away from the fighting, and with a prosperous economy - adding sugar to the cotton based agricuture, and with a large slave population - it would have served as a command center for the Confederate Navy, perhaps preventing the Union Navy from entering the Gulf of Mexico and taking New Orleans to control the Mississippi River.

I don't know exactly what that Americanized Cuba would have looked like, though. I suppose any colonization would have been slow, but without Spain in control, it may have been a bit faster. I'm thinking it would have looked a lot like south Florida. SouthWriter 00:31, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

Nomination
Just a quick reminder that you still need to accept the nomination on the request for user rights page. I realize that you did do so on my page, but for formalities' sake... ;) Lordganon 05:38, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Please provide me a link. I can't seem to locate that option. :-( SouthWriter 13:50, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

=(

http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Alternative_History:Request_for_user_rights#SouthWriter

Under the Discussion section. ^^

Lordganon 15:38, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks SouthWriter 15:40, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations
Congratulations, you are now a Brass in the TSPTF. In addition to your previous abilities as a Lieutenant, you can now adjust user rankings along with other behind-the-scenes administrative duties.

You have been conferred the title "Grand Elder of the Fromma Södra," but feel free to change it as you desire.

Again, Congratulations.

Lordganon 03:38, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

Pleading
As the Supervisor of the Liberation of Spokane Free State, I ask you to give the western part of Lincoln, US, as part of Spokane Free State. If you don't, then me & the LSFS will establish a provisional government in Leavenworth, former Washington state.

Greetings, Istoria. You need to sign your correspondence. I used the history to see who you were (though your recent activity has caught my attention elsewhere. However, requests such as yours are not done the way you lay this out.  First, you must present a proposal, labeling your article as such, and discuss it on the main talk page.  As you flesh out the plan, the community can determine if it fits in with the time line.  As it stands now, Spokane and much of Lincon were ruled by Neo-Nazi types for years and they spread out to try to take land from the Mormon state of Utah/Deseret. This was a big mistake!  As a result, the US annexed eastern Washington into Lincoln.  Though it might be possible for Spokane to become separate again, you will need to present a viable scenario to allow such.

I am indeed the one who unilaterally decided to add the area to Lincoln in the first place, so if the scenario makes sense I am willing to consider it. However, this is a community project (no one objected to my annexes the failed fascist state after it was determined that their defeat required it. As for setting up camp in Leavenworth, that might work, for it seems to be outside of what is now claimed by Victoria (but barely).  I would be interested in what claims the LSFS has on whatever lands in Washington state that you have in mind. SouthWriter 02:09, June 10, 2011 (UTC)