User talk:Arstarpool



Archive 

Uniting Ithaca and Binghamton
I might be interested in uniting Binghamton and Ithaca into a Republic of New York. There is one problem. There is a county in between the counties that Ithaca and Binghamton control (Tompkins and Broome). It is Tioga county, and it must be brought into the union as well. After this I see at least seven surrounding counties (primarily to the east and west of the three counties) that could eventually be brought into the Republic. --Yank 02:58, December 12, 2010 (UTC)

Not really. The region the three counties in question doesn't lend itself to a survivor state name. It's rather blandly called the "Southern Tier". If this was further east it could have been called the "Catskill Republic" or the "Republic of the Catskills". Rather gruesome, but far more interesting than "Southern Tier". In fact, the Catskill Republic might actually be viable in itself. Unless there is some name from the region that has tickled your fancy, I rather think we should stick to "Republic of New York". The concept is well-used, but the people would want some connection to the past. --Yank 04:50, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

The name "Republic of the Finger Lakes" is another potential name. --Yank 04:53, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

Well I'm out of names. Do you have any ideas? --Yank 17:25, December 13, 2010 (UTC)

Yes I'm still up for unifying them. I just need someone to give the article a more solid history section. Could you help me on that? --Yank 16:43, March 25, 2011 (UTC)

When graduating articles...
Besides removing the proposal template and the discussion on the main page, you still need to archive the discussion and add the new article to the list of the main page. Please do so soon. Mitro 01:06, December 15, 2010 (UTC)

Celtic Alliance territory of Stranraer
How attached are you to the Straraer area as part of the Celtic Alliance? I've got an idea for mid/late next year that the New Scottish State (or Ur Alba as it'll be by then) could kick the Celts out of that area and take control, i'll only go ahead if it's ok with you (as the CA's Editor), and if it is ok, i'll give you some notice when its going to happen--Smoggy80 13:35, December 19, 2010 (UTC)

As i've had no message off you, am i right in assuming that this proposal is ok? it just i'll need to start setting the invasion up early in the new year--Smoggy80 13:58, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

I'll hold the invasion off for now (may happen just before winter 2011) but i'm going to build up a small military force on the border using the Scots excuse of 'protecting the Scottish homeland against the invading imperialistic Celts' sound ok?--Smoggy80 12:28, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

I've moved the border between Ur Alba (as it is now) and the Celts from the A713 to the A714, the next major road westwards, the border will be held there for the rest of the year as Ur Alba's priority is taking lands to the east. However the planned invasion of Stranraer will prob still take place late 2011 or early 2012, i'll keep you updated--Smoggy80 11:32, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

To keep you updated on the CA - Ur Alba territorial claims. Ur Alba is massing its military in the area between the two border walls near Stranraer (know as the Macintire wall and the MacDonald wall) it has also sent vessels from the Ur Alba port of Ayr with the plan to blockade the port of Stranraer. My plan is to make life difficult for the population of Stranraer by using the blockade to stop supplies from the sea and seige the town from the west using troops, then at the end of summer give the population a choice, join Ur Alba and leave the CA, or face a large military offensive. Sound Ok to you?--Smoggy80 15:14, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Capital
I don't mind really, I really just want a beautiful capital. I liked Cape Coral, becuase its on the sea, or Saint Aug. But I would be perfectly happy with Gainesville.--Sunkist- 19:52, December 20, 2010 (UTC)

College Football (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 for 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 20:20, December 20, 2010 (UTC)

Genoa and Tuscany
Well, I figure that the war will make some kind of dispute between them, but they'll get over it. Nothing like how Venice will feel, lol.

I do see a rivalry between the two over New Rome (and to an extent Sardinia as well, though Tuscan occupation zones on the mainland would mean that Genoa will have the lead there, realistically) that would be the source of tension.

Past that, the only thing would potentially an issue would be something to do with La Spezia and past excavations.

I do see generally good relations between them, however.

Lordganon 08:57, December 22, 2010 (UTC)

Templates
mira arstar como puedo crear un template para mis timlines nuevos?Migue235 23:56, January 1, 2011 (UTC)

Border Line
Cant remember where I said that, but I do know that I at one point believed New Rome to be further north for some reason.

I do have them being freed, mind - and given its position, it would technically be part of the zone, if that helps. You'll need to zoom in the Italy map a fair bit, but you'll see it there.

Would like to know the difference between its size on that map and what you think it should be as well, mind.

Lordganon 01:21, January 4, 2011 (UTC)

Qu'il Tous
Hey Arstar, I just renamed No Napoleon's Elba into Qu'il Tous, I just want to know if you can construct me a map or find me one of Napoleonic Europe that I can use, just a real one, like for Napoleon's World or French Trafalger, British Waterloo. Ownerzmcown 22:01, January 26, 2011 (UTC)

Left message on Pelee Island
Talk:Pelee (1983: Doomsday), Benkarnell 23:18, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Prescott
Thought I'd leave you a note saying that I'd adopted the Prescott article you created and put up for adoption. Lordganon 05:43, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Sure, that's fine. Arstar 01:13, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

Macau
Hi. I was curious about your Macau article. I'm planning a survivor state containing most of the nearby area, and I wanted to either adopt Macau or work jointly work on the Pearl River Delta area. Thanks. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:49, February 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * As a note, his survivor state is non-existent because the area is already controlled by Macau. Lordganon 12:27, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for stating the obvious. I want to have a peaceful conversation about the area with the owner. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 14:59, February 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Did I say that you couldn't adopt it? No. I merely stated that the planned survivor state had turned bust, because given his level of inactivity, Arstar would not notice/find it. Apologies for his reaction, Arstar. Lordganon 15:24, February 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, LG. It's been a while, huh?
 * But yeah, Kenny, your survivor state couldn't make it off the ground if I'm in control in Macau.
 * I'd hate to be rude, but I'd have to ask that you don't adopt my survivor state and that you could move your planned state to another area, as even if I gave you Macau there is a large amount of radiation in the way from Hong Kong. Arstar 23:25, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd hate to be rude, but I'd have to ask that you don't adopt my survivor state and that you could move your planned state to another area, as even if I gave you Macau there is a large amount of radiation in the way from Hong Kong. Arstar 23:25, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Not exactly sure what you mean, but okay. I didn't really care what existed, in the Pearl River Delta I just thought it was a shame there were no articles about that area. I'll probably write Hong Kong and Guangzhou, and I might write some stuff in Macau to harmonize. If there's anything I write that you don't like, let me know. But I probably won't start for awhile because of school. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:33, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I meant that the Pearl River Delta is under Macau's control, but I wouldn't mind you expanding on it, but nevertheless I'll keep an eye open for the next few weeks to see the progress. (-unsigned)

Okay, I don't have a problem with that. Thanks for your interest. How exactly do you want to cover up Macau's loss of a majority of its jobs in gambling and tourism? That's what I'm interested to know. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 00:03, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Ah, but how could you "cover up" the employment loss? Sure, some would become fishers or manufacturers or boat-repairmen and such, but Macau, even in its new expanded state does not have the resource or the room for a high employment state. So, we'd have a rough number of 30 to 50 percent unemployment. Arstar 00:07, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Okay. I'll work that into the article. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 00:20, March 1, 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Here's a map which you can veto if you want. Here. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:27, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

I'm not for drastic size changes so I'd cut it back by 1/3 of how it is on your map. Arstar 02:50, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

I tried to match this. Is it okay if the areas on the map are just "claimed?" I don't feel like changing the map drastically lol. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 03:20, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

From what I gather on the China map, the borders would be more like this.Oerwinde 11:25, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm. Was the China map created by Arstarpool or based directly off the article? Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 14:04, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

I created the China map. The article was based on the map.Oerwinde 17:27, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Okay. I'll have some of the areas like Hong Kong be "partially controlled." I'm not sure about expanding any further to the west than Yangjiang. The people in Taishan speak Toisaan Wa, and what I hear, Cantonese people can understand it barely. When Mandarin starts to die, the linguistic difference would be difficult, especially with perfectly Cantonese people on the other side of the river. What do you think? Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:02, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Well, that makes sense considering how the map is designed. The dark color is the solid control, the lighter color is areas that are under loose control or basically defer to Macau for leadership.Oerwinde 22:04, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Okay. My idea is Macau's economy dies but rebounds as a food distribution centre. Gwongjau (Guangzhou) and Hong Kong split into several small clans of which are connected to the Triads. Macau intervenes somewhat but there is still chaos. Shenzhen is basically in the middle. Meanwhile, lands to the east are a bit more stable and rural. The official language is Cantonese, as Mandarin and Portuguese have lost their status. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 23:12, March 11, 2011 (UTC)


 * Apologies for this note - I can't stand by and watch him ignore canon. Kenny, All three of the cities you quote are gone. As in no one left. Thus, there cannot be clans, or anything like it, from there. The official languages of Macau today, and have always been, Cantonese and Portuguese. There is a lot of people that speak it left in the area, and that would not change. Lordganon 04:19, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

I mean the people on the outskirts of the blast zone. For example, take Hong Kong. The blast would have probably beem aimed downtown, in Victoria. That means only part of Hong Kong Island would be within the zone of a pressure of 5 (kg or something i forget) psi. And that doesn't mean total destruction. There's still places like Ap Lei Island, Lantau Island, and the New Territories. Don't try to tell me the areas were rural at the time, Ap Lei is the most densely populated decent-sized island in the world. What I see is the survivors within the 5 psi limit and the people on the outlying areas scrambling for food. At first they will peacefully send firstborns to gather food in rural areas at farms or salvaging scrap in affected areas. However, once Triads and other criminals begin inciting anger among the people, it would definitely cause forms of internal violence. Violence means division, and obviously that would cause the rise of "clans" for lack of a better Chinese term.

As for national language, yes they will be Cantonese and Portuguese. The point I'm trying to make is Mandarin will be dead, English will be dead, and Portuguese is effectively dead. Cantonese unifies the region. 27 years of not applying the other languages would make them dead. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 04:57, March 12, 2011 (UTC

Sorry Kenny, but I'd appreciate it if you would NOT change the size of Macau and only work on the economics and other asthetic changes. Arstar 21:05, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

Okay. I'll split it between Macau and "Zhongshan Republic" or something along those lines. I'll add Oumuhn, Toisaan, Yeuhnggong, and Gongmuhn to Macau and the rest will be an extremely precarious semi-survivor state. The maps took five hours. Sorry if I'm sounding annoying, but I intend to do something with the Gwong-Sam-Heung area because there's a ton of potential there. Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 22:18, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

Kenny, I am going to be stern when I say this but the size of Macau will remain as it was when I created it.

I am currently away from the community but I can trust LG and the rest of the gang to make sure you abide to realism. Remember Hong Kong was destroyed, which would put alot of radiation to the nearby area (and Macau itself, albiet not to much) but keep it small and keep it realistic. I'll come back on Friday. Arstar 22:26, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

For some reason LG got really hyped up over this question of whether Macau can have its capital temporarily moved to another city until 2005 or something, not really sure why. It doesn't go against canon at all, but: am I allowed permission to do this? My stated reason is that severe pollution and acid rain from Guangzhou would cause a decrease in air and water quality that might threaten the lives of politicians. Please reply. Thanks! Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 20:06, June 17, 2011 (UTC)

Simply put, Arstar, he is attempting to go beyond your permissions, and as you requested, I'm not letting him.

As for his claim, simply put, wind patterns have the radiation and rain going away from Macau, and, indeed, hitting the area that he claims they would move the capital to. He has made somewhere in the area of a dozen assumptions about the matter, all of which on their own are quite silly, but as a whole are ridiculous. And this makes no sense if even one of those is an assumption, yet they all are. Simple wind pattern map - winds in the upper atmosphere, may I add - comparison shows he is wrong on the rain, and looking at a map, along with remembering his assumptions about Guangzhou and how rivers work - and how wrong he is - shows that even if it were possible, such flow of pollution would miss the city completely, going out to sea or ending up at Hong Kong. Again, he has failed to take notice of reality at all in his claims.

Not only that, by the time any of them realized such, the trouble would have passed anyways.

Far as I'm concerned, this is just Kenny being biased against Macau itself and in favor of the entirely Chinese regions inland.

Lordganon 20:31, June 17, 2011 (UTC)


 * @LG no one asked for your argument. @Arstar entire discussion can be found Talk:1983: Doomsday.  Detectivekenny (Info; Talk)  18:18, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Pay no attention to that line of his. That is, by far not the entire matter, though I see how he would want you to believe that. And I've every right to comment on things that concern things I've been asked to do, no matter what you may think, Kenny. Lordganon 00:26, June 19, 2011 (UTC)

Celtic territorial claims
Just updating the ol'map. Just give a rough map of the Celtic Alliance's territorial claims, and what it controls, maybe a sphere of influence and I'll incorporate it in. Mumby 18:10, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

Celtic Activity
Hi Arstar. I'm wondering whether you have any plans regarding the Celtic Alliance. Despite being a major regional power, the CA has done, to put it colloquially, bugger all recently (besides the non-canon East British blockade). I think that this is rather implausible and unrealistic; as a large nation it should be acting at least as much as the other British nations, but presently isn't. Please understand that this isn't an attack on you - I fully appreciate you have other commitments that take up time you could spend on the CA.

However, this leads me to my next points: one, with other commitments it might be ideal to hand over control of the article to people with more time on their hands; and two, your commitments are mainly relevant to you (the plurality appear to be in the former US), meaning you wouldn't be able to go into as intimate detail as people with more local knowledge could. Where I'm heading is obvious: would you be interested in handing over caretaking responsibilities to us British editors?

This would be beneficial to the region as it would allow for more realistic progress, both in terms of timespan and local sentiment. It would also free you of at least one of your many responsibilities.

I can fully understand if you wouldn't wish to do this. I, in fact, agree that we should have at least some outside influence in the affairs of the British Isles so that we editors don't get carried away. And I can understand that controlling the CA is something of a prestigious position within the community. However, though I appreciate this, from my point of view you have (recently) devoted little time to the article itself, or the nation's affairs, leaving it unresponsive - and therefore unrealistic, especially in a changing timeline.

To sum up, I ask you to consider handing over the position of caretaker of the CA to either the British editors, or another member of the community. Or, failing that, to at least devote more time to the nation and its affairs. Thanks. Fegaxeyl 20:39, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

Ah! I am sorry I've taken so long to respond.

I don't have much time, but I am agreeing to hand over editing responsibilities to you and whoever else wishes to pilot the article for the time being, although I should be back by July 2nd. Arstar 02:37, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Badges
hey arsar i made a wiki some time ago but i dont know how to create badges for people to win them, i thought you could help thanks Migue235 Founder of ANCW 22:38, July 18, 2011 (UTC)

Australia Article
Hi,

I was wondering if I can adopt your Austrailia (1983: Doomsday) article?Enclavehunter 19:20, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks.Enclavehunter 03:18, December 3, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Long Time, No See
Yeah, I've more or less inherited administrative control, for better or worse.

1983 is still going. New articles have slowed a touch, but we've had no shortage of new editors make proposals in the last few months (now, if they would just finish the blasted things....)

Myself, South, Brian, Fx, Smoggy, and Fed are all fairly active. Oer and a few others a little less so, but they're still around. Vlad and Ben have returned in some form lately, too. A few newer contributors have been sticking around a bit, but have been gone as of late - I figure that they are going to be back when they have time.

Map Games are indeed the biggest thing right now, much to my annoyance.

I'd love it if you came back on some level. Past that, whether you do or not, what should I do with your articles? I've gotten a little pressure about those in the last few months, if you catch my drift.

Lordganon 01:37, December 3, 2011 (UTC)

Yep. The administration of the wiki is now more or less up to me.

Good to hear. I did make an effort to keep your things a bit updated, for all the good I could do.

If you go away again, please give more detailed instructions on what to do with you articles, lol. Would save me a lot of having to deal with lunacy xD

Unfortunately, there's no border or even empty territory between the CR and the new USA. A rejoining is really going to have to be out for the moment. A declaration that they would support rejoining in the future, should it become feasible, would work, however.

There's been a small amount of work done on the Spring, and I know that Brian and South are continuing it. I've done a bit towards it, too, with the crowning bit going to be reflected in the 2012 Superior Elections, and a small massacre in Visalia.

Lordganon 04:41, December 3, 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back
Welcome back, Arstar. Just wanted to say your new additions to California Republic look good. I hope you make good use of your Christmas vacation. The colleges around here get off this coming week, but I don't know about the high schools.

By the way, I've already secured the official union of the USAR to the USA. It's mostly on paper, of course, due to the distance. But radio contact - at least short wave - assures that the new state can communicate with the mainland. I seem to remember that you were thinking that Florida may be of a mind to rejoin the US in some way as well. I'm not sure they'd be as gung-ho as the Remnant, though, because they have made steps toward independence that the USAR never made (being the loyal remnant the way they are).

Any way, it's good to see you back in the fray. SouthWriter 04:55, December 3, 2011 (UTC)

Question About Communication Discussion
Hi Arstar. I noticed you removed the discussion regarding Communication from the main page. It is still ongoing. I am currently assembling and planning to post my research on the subject which I have been conducting the last two months for the group to review. Since it will be important, where should I post it? Thanks.--Fxgentleman 01:55, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

Hi, just wanted to let you know I put my responce to your message on my discussion page in case you may have forgotten that is what I do. Have a good night.--Fxgentleman 05:45, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

1983 Talk Page
Arstar, you really should not have done that. Now I have to go through and fix all of it. Please don't do it again. Lordganon 08:30, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

No, that was not all you did. And yes, you did screw up quite a bit. Lordganon 01:27, December 6, 2011 (UTC)

This is now the third time you've done this and I've had to fix it. Please don't do it again. Lordganon 08:55, January 14, 2012 (UTC)

Brief Announcement
Hi this is to anyone who wishes to contact me that I will not be avaliable throughout the next week as I have mid-terms. I will be avaliable after the 17/18th of December. Arstar 20:46, December 11, 2011 (UTC)

Taiwan-Guangxi Relations
Hi Arstar, I was wondering what Taiwan would do if they bumped into a communist nation's expedition in 1993 in Jiangxi or Fujian. Thanks

Scandinator 02:17, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

What communist nation is this in particular, one thats already made or one that your planning to make? If its based out of Jiangxi or Fujian, especially Fujian, I would have to say that maybe you should look for another area for your nation as canon. Canon dictates that this was pretty much a disaster area and was under some pretty uncivilized regimes. If its a state based further inland in southern China or another SouthEast Asian state I'm interested in your proposal and working with you but Taiwan would definitely be hostile, maybe not physically but this "expedition" would likely get a staredown from the Taiwanese. They claim all of China sans Tibet already, but southern China is definitely their backyard even outside their official borders.

Nevertheless I'd be interested to hear your ideas and please contact me. I will be posting this on both your talkpage and mine but I'd prefer if we talked in this one. Arstar 04:37, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, also LG asked me to add in Macau with my questions as you are the editor in charge of it. LG recommended the location to me. I have started work on my Guangxi article. It is near Yunan and claims five of the Chinese provinces; Gunagxi, Guangdong, Hunan, Guizhou and Sichuan. Its communist but moving away from that, when the supreme leader dies the state will become a technocracy. I have loose control over half of Guangxi and Guizhou and part of Hunan.

I need to know what Macau would do if they met this nation's expedition in late 1991? and Taiwan between 1994 and 1997.Scandinator 11:26, January 6, 2012 (UTC)

About harmonizing the articles I'm only going to do the contact and immediate aftermath this week as I will not have much time till the 15th. The "supreme leader" dies of cancer in 1994 though and that allows Guangxi to become a technocracy which is the ideal form of government incorporating capitalism and communism with more of the first.

I envisage an age of mutual co-operation from 1994 and f or the future of our articles this year, one of my ideas was unification in mid 2012 and then an invasion of Yunnan in late 2012. But if you do not wish to let go of Macau I will fully understand. Post your proposal here. Scandinator 13:24, January 7, 2012 (UTC)

If you want since you don't have time I will harmonize the articles, thats up to you. The thing with Macau is that I allowed Kenny to work on it as neither I nor Yank were, and he turned it into one of the biggest dramas in the past year by completely changing it from what I had envisioned. I need to go back in and do some cleanup on that article soon, maybe today. The main reason I'm against unification is that Macau is drastically culturally different that of China, and at the time it was still a Portugese colony, thus still had a sizable European and Catholic population most of whom didn't leave until Macau was transferred to China only a decade ago. Arstar 17:57, January 7, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I do not see a problem with a technocracy and Macau uniting especially after 20 years of contact and the fact that Macau has absorbed so much of mainland China and its ways. I have finished my holiday lectures and therefore now have time to work on AltHist. After 1994 when the supreme leader dies the nation becomes a technocracy - the ultimate form of capitalist and communist ideals.Scandinator 22:08, January 16, 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't exactly describe a Technocracy as the ultimate form of capitalist and communist ideals, its a form of government in which decisions are made by specialists in the field the decision requires. When I created Macau I originally envisioned it as a technocracy but Arstar changed it, so unification in a couple decades is extremely likely considering Kenny pushing it towards a neo-confucian state, which is pretty much half-way to a technocracy anyway.Oerwinde 06:34, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

United States Expansion (1983DD)
Hi, Arstar. I fogot whether you liked messages on your talk page or "in line," so I headed over here. You asked me over on my talkpage about whether it was time to act on the expansion mentioned above (Welcome Back). The answer is simple: I'm ready when you are! Let me know what you have in mind.

Also, in case you didn't notice, I've adopted "Apalachicola" but have only got as far as the info box. That is my "home turf"/"ancestral home"! That section is considered part of "North Florida" (AKA "Gainesville") except for a little bit west of the River. I've mentioned west of the River as being "officially" claimed by the Republic of Florida. I have a bunch of cousins in and around the area being considered.

Sorry about the links - once I got the first one to work (took some doing), I couldn't seem to stop. :-) SouthWriter 22:00, January 7, 2012 (UTC)

Proposals
I wouldn't mind If you would want to adopt some of my abandoned ideas.

Yank 05:05, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

I would love to get back to some of my articles, but Principia Moderni is taking up more and more of my time on the wiki. Whatever you can do to help my articles become graduated would be amazing.

Yank 05:09, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

I admit that "adopting" is not exactly what I had in mind. I think "Co-Authoring", like what we did with Macau, or what I did with Vlad on the various Yugoslavian countries (minus Macedonia), is more like what I have in mind. You tell me the articles you are going to be asisting with, and I will recognize your aid on my userpage. You know, I was inspired to start officially recognizing collaborators when I saw your userpage.

Yank 18:02, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

Celtic Alliance
While I was among the first to say that the British editors should be allowed to edit the article freely, given there more local knowledge, I must protest your note to smoggy.

The British editors have shown several times now that they will, most likely, expand their own nations, and let the Alliance get nothing, despite how implausible that sounds. The interests are in direct competition, so to speak.

You need to keep the article, or hand it off to someone not with opposing interests to it.

Lordganon 07:27, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

I will greatfully accept your offer, however as LG seems to have a problem with it I will put it to the OBN editors that it is run by committee (that way one person cannot take it over and run it in favour of their own nations) and also that any major changes will have to be voted on before a change can take place.

That seem ok to you?

and also you LG, as i'm sure you'll be keeping an eye on this discussion?

--Smoggy80 17:12, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

Ok i've put it to the OBN editors, i've given them till the end of the month to leave any comments (some only log on intermittently), so i'll let you know in early Feb if the OBN editors will be interested in taking over --Smoggy80 17:23, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

That does nothing to prevent the problem. Whatsoever.

Lordganon 19:38, January 10, 2012 (UTC)

Why not do what we did a couple years back and have any changes require community consensus? It used to be a community timeline and now its just a bunch of individual fenced off areas with some stern "NO TRESSPASSING" signs.Oerwinde 09:51, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

Now that, that I like. Lordganon 10:08, January 11, 2012 (UTC)

North German Flag
Hey, I was wondering if you minded me changing the North German flag. The emphasis on Schleswig-Holstein bugs me now that they control large areas outside there, and with their membership in the Nordic Union I was thinking a more nordic flag. I found this one on wikipedia that I liked: Oerwinde 19:26, January 20, 2012 (UTC)

Since you haven't edited the page in a year, and I've had no response in a week, I'm going to adapt the rules on adoption and go ahead and change it.Oerwinde 04:30, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about not answering, but sure go ahead and change it. Arstar 18:59, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

The CA in former France
I've made the following post on the CA talk page, see what you think.

Over the past couple of weeks i've been looking at the maps and if the CA uses the rivers to consolodate the boundaries there are a nice set to use, with the River Loire as the southern boundary, and using its tributary the River Sarthe as its eastern boundary with a short land boundary to the source of the Eure River (also used as an eastern boundary) and then follow it to the sea as the River Seine.



This would also give a solid boundary with Orleans. What does everyone think? --Smoggy80 17:02, January 27, 2012 (UTC)

I'm posting on you page not only because you are still the CA editor but also the Orleans editor.--Smoggy80 17:07, January 27, 2012 (UTC)

To be honest I don't see a reason for the CA to expand more in the Isles or even the slightest bit in France. The common-held misconception with the British editors and the nation-states they create is that the Celtic Alliance is this Nazi Germany-esque out-of-control empire that wants to take over all of Europe but in reality its only laying claims to the Celtic regions of the British Isles and France. You guys say things like "maybe we can beat the CA to this place" or "maybe some of England will remain" but seriously the Celtic Alliance does not care that much about England other than Cornwall and even then once England becomes an organized nation again it will likely give most of Cornwall back.

France is very unorganized in this TL due to most of its editors having left the site but I don't see the CA taking even the slightest bit of France other than what is a Celtic region (which Normandy isn't, but it was the birthplace of the modern English monarchy) so they'd likely remain in the two peninsulas and not officially annex the land between them. Arstar 18:59, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

could you please tell LG about your plans!! (if you haven't already) as he's pretty much took over the CA expansion and the OBN editors have gone along with it, all of Wales with some of the neighbouring english counties was all I was expecting to become the CA but he kept insisting about New London and how it must be connected to the rest of the CA

Plus it was always my intention for the CA to give back the majority of lands seized from Ur Alba (after the Ur Alba war) back to Southern Scotland when it gets up and running--Smoggy80 17:15, January 30, 2012 (UTC)

You are still the Editor of the Celtic Alliance, correct? if you are you may want LG to back off a little because he is starting to act like the articles his and his alone as he is now effectivly saying you can't do what you want with your own article on the OBN page, also if you want me to take over the CA fully let me know as i'm still happy to take over no matter what LG says.

I Promise I won't do anything silly with it like conquering the Nordic Union or anything

--Smoggy80 18:40, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

Wow...I posted a whole reply yesterday and for some reason I must have deleted it. I had around 7 paragraphs but what I was basically gonna say is that LG's authoritarianism has marred the "community spirit" of this timeline and made it impossible to congregate as a group without getting permission from him. It has even been noticed by the veteran Brass members whose names I won't mention back in December when Kenny proposed impeaching him but you can see for yourself. If LG stumbles upon this I sternly request him to cut it out before more members rage-quit this Wiki.

To simplify it for everyone, you will be the primary caretaker. You don't have to consult me for anything feel free to make independent decisions but if something just happens to look fishy or worth bringing up I will discuss it with you or revert it if in the highly unlikely scenario you did have it take over the Nordic Union, lol.

So if you wanted to say, for example, have the Celtic Alliance construct a battleship (just an example) you wouldn't need to consult me just write it in. If I had an idea I would bring it up on your talk page and consider it allowable unless you contest to it. This way we keep the fears of "hometown syndrome" out while still allowing the British editors to keep it involved with what is happening on the rest of the Isles. Arstar 21:03, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

Re: Issy-Snoqualmie
Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to you. I'll add some work to it soon, I do plan on finishing it.

KingSweden 00:03, February 3, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Imperial China and Siberian Manchuria
First of, I'll warn you that you will not like what I have to say on the matter xD. I believe that it stands to reason that Siberia wouldn't tolerate openly hostile nations anywhere near its borders and with Imperial China so close to their borders, some military response would be given. I already had an idea about an incident that would provoke war between the two countries. This month, there is going to be a referendum in Siberian Manchuria on wether to rename and create a Republic of China between Manchuria and Uyghuristan, brought on by Chinese nationalists. This would fail, but during that day, the greatest attack of Imperial Chinese sympathizers happens. The details aren't important now, maybe a bombing or smaller squads wreaking havoc in the streets. This could then escalate into a war.

Also, I don't know what your stance is on raiding in Korea. The Korea article states that they are basically at the same risk of being attacked by "Chinese raiders". Do you think this might refer to Imperial China? If so, they might have a vested interest in "taking out" Imperial China.Vladivostok 08:49, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

I think the Chinese Raiders in Korea are mostly independent bands in northern Korea venturing south. At least when we were creating Korea that was the idea of the lawless north.Oerwinde 10:32, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

Oh ok, but still, there does seem to be a need, as expressed in the Foreign relations part of the Korea article, to deal with the question of the remainder of Manchuria. What the end result might be- another conquest by Siberia, a newly created state or a return to status quo after any incident remains to be seen.Vladivostok 10:54, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

To be honest I really like the idea of a big war to spice up the timeline :D. I won't look at it as "my nation vs. your nation" but rather would actually be a realistic outcome. My idea is that during an attempted meeting in either Korea, Imp China or the rump PRC with multinational officials an assasination/bombing occurs, like what you said. Rather than outright have Imp China do it I think it should be unknown, buit Siberia automatically blames Imp China and goes to war with them. This upsets a lot of local states which would begin to take sides, bringing in the Republic of China/Taiwan who would likely take the side of Imp China, and Korea taking the side of Siberia. The PRC would either stay neutral or join a side, although they're pretty much hated by both sides so I'm not sure.

In terms of Imperial Chinese-Korean relations, there's not much that the Qin Chinese would want in Korea, and the North of it for that matter, which is likely still lagging behind the southern part. They don't respect the Koreans but they wouldn't raid them either. Thier only justification for raiding Manchuria is to regain the northern provinces, not raiding for the sake of loot and murder. Arstar 21:22, February 17, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad that you're interested. I have to ask, why would these individual countries (Korea, Imperial China, Siberia and the PRC) meet for a conference. I feel that with my idea we wouldn't have to take the extra step of explaining the meeting, but I don't mind the idea. So, what would this conference be about? Vladivostok 08:50, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

Re Conference: Since the PRC and Siberia both don't recognize Imperial China, and Siberia likely doesn't recognize the PRC, I also wonder about such a conference.Oerwinde 09:04, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

So, any opinion on the points Oer and I raised above? Vladivostok 12:51, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

Ok then no conference. Why don't we stick to the bomb idea then? Arstar 22:05, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

Well sure, we can do that. The whole referendum thing kind of came and went, but that doesn't mean we couldn't write something along the lines of there being so much displeasure with the results that there are attacks and bombings. However, what at first looked like attacks from Siberian citizens turn out to be attacks from Imp Chinese agitators. Or there could be an attack on the Korean-Siberian railroad, making the Koreans try and join the war as well. Perhaps a daring attack on the Vostochny Cosmodrome. There are really numerous places to bomb. Vladivostok 22:28, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

The train bombing is a good idea, but not while the train is in Korea because the Imperials don't really bother them. When you want the attack to occur? And we need to pan out an approximate timeline of the "war" as Taiwan will likely get involved and Jiangsu too if Oer agrees. Arstar 02:30, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I was leaning towards an attack on the railroad as well. However, since the Korean-Siberian railroad would anger Koreans one way or the other, considering that there would certainly be Koreans on the train. And as far as I am concerned, we can have the bombing occur next week. Furthermore, we should probably pick out a name for the war.

Also, I understand that you want to give Imp China a better chance in the war, really, I do, but what would Taiwan and Jiangsu gain with a war? Jiangsu has been recognized by the PRC recently and that country will become one of the most important food importers, which would surpass Imp China in scope. As for Taiwan, I figured that they wouldn't get involved, as you say on the Taiwan page that It is likely that in the future, when the countries' borders meet, the dispute will turn armed. So, when their borders meet, it could escalate. How can Taiwan wage a war so far away from its main territory. I see them maybe giving weapons and supplies, but a full scale war doesn't seem likely to me. Vladivostok 08:24, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Jiangsu would likely try to stay neutral in any armed conflict. While they're pretty much the most established and stable nation in northern China, they know they're no match for the USSR event with Imp. China's help. The PRC is in no condition to fight a war with the USSR either. As for Taiwan, they have the industry and manpower to fight, but a blockade would cripple them and a war with the USSR while they're fighting to claim mainland china would overextend them. All four would likely be able to keep the USSR out, so the USSR would likely try to make sure they fight themselves rather than unite. If there is going to be a war, it will likely be only with Imp. China.Oerwinde 11:31, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

So, what do you think? Should we go ahead with the war, create an article about it and perhaps move any further discussion there? Vladivostok 09:03, March 3, 2012 (UTC)

If there is a war can I write the page? Tell me the result and length and I'll create the page. Scandinator (talk) 05:13, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

Scan, although I do appreciate your offer, I think I can speak for both myself and Arstar when I say that we, as caretakers of the mentioned nations, would like to write the article. This is not to say that you cannot contribute to the article. In a couple of days, if Arstar does not address what Oer and I wrote, I'll create an article about a war and its causes and we can move all discussion to that article then. There you would of course write about Guanxi's reaction to the war in a section regarding international reactions. Vladivostok 10:03, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, sure. No problem and I'll be happy to help in any part of writing the article. Scandinator (talk) 08:33, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

So, today I created an article regarding the war. And this is it: Second Manchurian War. It is the second war, as I believe we can consider Siberia's invasion and integration of Northern Manchuria in 1990 to be the first one. So, I think it would be best if we continue our discussion here. Vladivostok 14:25, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, Vlad is right this is better something that we do since we're the ones who in charge of the nations, but thanks for the offer.

Not to get into role-play mode but I'm having Taiwan as a supporter of IC, not so much to even the odds but Taiwan does not like Siberia for their conquests in Northern China. I will flesh out the IC article to denote the individual towns and villages so that we can make a clear order of which ones will fall first. Arstar 07:49, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

Although I'm not entirely opposed to some help from Taiwan, I think that it has to be made clear that it will not send troops. It helps with supplies, but not as an active participant in the war. Fleshing out what cities are part of Imperial China is a good idea, we'll definitely need that. And feel free to move the discussion to the war page, so that we don't clutter up your talk page with planning the war. Vladivostok 13:45, March 7, 2012 (UTC)

Guangxi
Hey Arstar

Can we attmept to harmonize the articles of Macau, Taiwan and Guangxi? After this it will be almost ready to graduate.Scandinator (talk) 05:27, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Arstar, Scan's got the idea in his head that canon needs to be... adjusted? so that his proposal matches it. As an fyi. Lordganon 08:25, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

I think what he means by harmonizing it is so both articles mention when they encountered each other. Guangxi's new existance won't affect anything else. Has happened with a ton of articles.Oerwinde 09:49, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

What he's saying, and what he "means" are decidedly not the same thing. Lordganon 09:52, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't responded earlier, but Scan I will harmonize Macau and Taiwan to create a more harmonized history between the two nations, but I wil not include Guangxi as that is against the rules to change canon for a proposal's sake. You can then use that unified timeline to reflect on Guanxi's.

I still think that Guanxi should be further reduced in size. These "influence realms" and whatnot are really proving to be bothersome. They were supposed to represent the estimated growth of a nation when they first started showing up on maps and now people use them as a way to make their nations look bigger than they actually are.

Nevertheless, I agree that it is ready for canon if a few minor changes are made. The "vast" surplus of rice needs to go, as does the size of the military. Militaries should always be at most a 2-5% of the population, not. They should be able to communicate with the ANZC as they're right next to the "developed" world.

The biggest offender is the claim of having nuclear weapons. No way. LoN would be over that in a heartbeat.

Those are my only issues, and other than that you have my approval. Much, much bigger chance of graduating than Gansu in its current form. Arstar 20:32, February 21, 2012 (UTC)

The size of Guangxi is only the dark green area. Guangxi holds influence over the remaining areas and they do represent further explansion plans. I fully acknowledge that Guangxi does not control those regions but merely is able to tax and trade with the local chiefs and villages. I,ve changed the "vast" to "small" but this region is one of the most fertile on the planet. The military is only ~3% of the population of the directly controlled areas. Nukes are also gone. Scandinator (talk) 08:32, February 22, 2012 (UTC)

Still...you can mention the areas in specific but I wouldn't have them on a map. Most people percieve that as being part of the territory, which they wouldn't be unless you explicitly stated that they were.

Thats my opinion though. I wouldn't object if you proposed it now, everything else looks good to me. Arstar 20:41, February 22, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Btw, I am going to get Guangxi into a major expanding drive to the coast during April-May. Also as Oer pointed out in the above section on Guangxi a union may actually be likely as the states have a similar form of government. Also, might you know who the editor for Sicily is? Scandinator (talk) 08:03, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't do that...that's what a lot of people do when they graduate an article, they keep it small in the beginning and then go into "expansion mode" right after. Mind you that actually setting up any coastal port, even the most basic ones will take at least a year or two.

Besdies Taiwan won't like that like at all. Their claims over all of China might be disputed but they take over more and more of Southern China every day. I warned you that Taiwan wouldn't be on the best of terms with Guangxi as it is but they'd likely be sacked/raided frequently if they continue growing.

I'm not outright saying no, but I'm against the expansion. That's just my opinion though.

Sicily was actually abandoned early on in the timeline but LG, Oer and I are the de facto caretakers as we wrote most of the stuff on Italy. If your planning on adopting it let me hear you ideas first but I'm not sure that its up for adoption. Arstar 22:00, February 23, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm part Italian and I would love to have a DD page in Italy... so I was thinking as the Sicily page mentions a lot of discontent with the mafia rule... could I start a revolt in Southern Italy and create a new nation under the protection of Greece? Scandinator (talk) 05:29, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

I'm just going to send a convoy to the coast, set up a port over a small coastal town and annex a part of the Baise prefecture. It's only "major" due to the tiny size of the state but it is minor on any other scale. Also the unification of Macau and Guangxi could also be for military purposes - stronger if Yunnan or Taiwan attack wither part. Scandinator (talk) 05:41, February 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * Far as I'm concerned, Sicily's not up for adoption.


 * As for Scan's revolt proposal... No. The discontent is barely present at all in areas now under its control, and the Greeks won;t have anything to do with it right now.


 * Lordganon 05:51, February 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * Then is there anything I can do in Italy? Scandinator (talk) 06:49, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Hey Arstar. You still haven't responded on possible talks to unite Macau and Guangxi. Together they could be a force to be reckoned with and much more safer against Taiwanese agression. Also just to reclarify Guangxi is not a communist nation and their political system is similiar to Macau's. Scandinator (talk) 05:38, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

Whoa, you want to unite Macau and Guangxi? Sorry but the thing is they're totally different culturally and Taiwan isn't really looking at conquering Macau, more the generic Chinese nations like Nanchung or Gansu.

Guangxi's best bet if they want to survive would be to optionally and peacefully cede themselves to Taiwan because they're pretty serious about taking over China. If they want to go to war that's fine but they wouldn't win likely unless they had support from Siberia or something. That won't happen for another year or two atleast though. Arstar 07:20, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

I think merging is actually quite likely if Taiwan doesn't conquer the area. Not any time soon, but say 20-30 years down the line I could see at least the idea enter the public mind. Uniting would make a lot of sense. Governmentally they're similar, Macau's neo-confucian government and Guangxi's technocracy would be quite complementary. Likely wouldn't be any sort of unitary government, more of a federation, but I could see it happening. To clarify, meging the two wouldn't likely happen while any of us are still on the wiki, but it definitely could happen.Oerwinde 08:24, February 27, 2012 (UTC)

Volkstaat
Hey, can I take over Volkstaat? I have some ideas that tie into my Azanian League article. Basically the guy who OTL came up with the idea, who at Doomsday was the commander of South Africa's defence forces, leads an exodus of white refugees from Pretoria and Johannesburg. Oerwinde 10:59, March 4, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, never really did a whole lot with the article. Go ahead :)Arstar 22:18, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

Winneconne
Hey, Arstar, just noticed that your Winneconne article, although deemed implausible here, is a good concept. I wonder if I can copy the concept of the Winneconne state for a project of mine on another wiki, is that okay? Godfrey Raphael 07:04, May 9, 2012 (UTC)

Arstar, that was not in the least what he asked. Moreover, he's already gotten a "no" since it violates our policies on the wiki. Lordganon (talk) 04:22, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

He was asking aout the concept, not a carbon copy of my article. So long as the project is not simlar to 1983DD, I don't see a problem with it. Arstar 18:09, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

Not only was that "project" a copy of DD, but it was definitely not the concept he was interested in - he copied it word for word taking no response as being permission to do it. He violated a rule of the wiki, big-time. Lordganon (talk) 04:53, July 20, 2012 (UTC)