Talk:Canada (1983: Doomsday)

Archive

Governor-General
What if the Governor-General dies before choosing a successor, how is the new Governor-General chosen? Mitro 20:03, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * What I was thinking was that there would be a sort of "Deputy Governor General", who was appointed when the Goveror General takes his/her position. When the GG dies or abdicates, the Deputy GG becomes the new GG and appoints a new Deputy GG. DarthEinstein 16:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. Mitro 16:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

GG is appointed by the monarch on advice of the Prime Minister. In practice this means the Prime Minister chooses the GG--Oerwinde 09:58, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, Oerwinde - I know that. But Canada in this Timeline changed that so that it would be more non-partisan. --DarthEinstein 16:21, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

Just found this out. OTL There is a Deputy Governor General appointed by the Governor General. They are generally chosen from either the Secretary of the Governor Geneal position, or the Justices of the Supreme court. They aren't permanent and are only appointed by the GG in advance of the GG being unavailable, for instance if they go on vacation or diplomatic mission. In the case of the GG dying or whatnot without choosing a Deputy, the Chief Justice of the Supreme court becomes the Administrator of Canada, taking on the responsibilities of the GG until a new one is chosen.

Deputy Governor General of Canada--Oerwinde 00:35, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

How about that. Well I guess in this timeline they just redefined this position. --DarthEinstein 16:57, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Happy Graduation
Canada is now canon, yay! Mitro 12:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hurrah! So can we still add things to it? DarthEinstein 14:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course, it now just means that the idea has been accepted by the community at large. See the Editorial Guidelines (1983: Doomsday) for more info.  Mitro 14:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Nouveau Quebec
As it is mainly inhabited by natives, the province would have probably been renamed Nunavik as it did *here*.--Marcpasquin 17:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmmm according to Wikipedia only the northernmost section is Nunavik, and I can't find a name that it had before the 50s other than Nunavik. Nouveau Quebec encompasses Nunavik and Jamesie, which is to the east of St. James bay. Maybe Nouveau Quebec should join Nunavut? DarthEinstein 17:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Map
I like the map, though I wonder if Nova Scotia has some claimed-only territory because of the bomb that went off on Halifax. Mitro 17:42, 18 June 2009 (UTC) I like the map so far. However if Canada can govern Navanut could they also control areas on the Hudson Bay coast? Especaly around the port of Churchill. After all these places can usualy be reached by sea or air,so there is little chance of refugies destableiseing the region.--ShutUpNavi 03:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Possible, though it did become a province in 2006, and with ships it would be easy to get to different parts of Nova Scotia. DarthEinstein 17:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmmm good point. I think they'd want to govern those areas as part of Nunavut until they had a significant population though, except on the Quebec coast which would be governed as Nouveau Quebec. I'll add that to the map. DarthEinstein 03:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Consolidation
I think we need to consolidate on the subheadings. Mitro 23:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah. Okay then, how many years per subheading?DarthEinstein 00:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Whatever seems most logical depending on the subject. I do like though how the TOC has pushed main content down away from the nation profile though.  Sorry but I can be annoying about format, its what I do all day at work.  Mitro 00:05, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There, I've consolidated it a bit. Don't worry about the amount of info in the last four subheadings, I'll get to them eventually. DarthEinstein 00:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

NorthEast USA?
Maine and around become Canada territory or something? i think is posible, reasonable. Is somebody live at south of the frontier? or in south cost of the lakes? --Fero 01:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think sometime soon a New Brunswick/Maine provincial governement might be established. However Canada's border hasn't reached the Great Lakes yet, so south of the lakes isn't likely right now. DarthEinstein 01:38, 25

June 2009 (UTC

Saguenay connection to gangs
I didn't create the saguenay republic for it to become the evil nemesis of Canada. For one thing, they are isolationist and would have nothing to gain from aiding the gangs of southern quebec.--Marcpasquin 13:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * They have protection to gain; they border the gangs too. Besides, these are only allegations. Also, it's natural that the two would come into conflict, as Canada claims all of Quebec, including Saguenay. DarthEinstein 13:48, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with a conflict between the two, either overt or covert. What I don't want is for one side to become the "evil one" which in my view would diminish the realistic nature of the conflict.--Marcpasquin 14:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry; I'll make sure they're portrayed fairly. DarthEinstein 04:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Population
Why are you raising Canada's population? Considering their position, and the loss of Sagneuney, they were fine were they were.

I was adding things up, and I decided that the previous number was a bit short. *Here*, Newfoundland = 500 000, Nova Scotia = 900 000, PEI = 150 000 to a total of 1 550 000. Of course, it's not that much in a post apocolyptic world, but that's only three of the provinces, so adding the regions of Quebec and Nunavut within this Canada and refugee populations, I think that 1.1 million is closer than 0.7 million. Also, due to foreign trade, they probably have better medical equipment than the rest of North America. --DarthEinstein 04:22, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

My estimate is about 1.5 million. I doubt that everyone survived in the Maritime Provinces, but 100,000 probably would have in Northern Quebec, and a 100,000 trickle out of what's left of Ontario. Add in a little bit of natural population growth to arrive at 1.4-1.5 million.--Loughery111 18:15, November 20, 2009 (UTC)


 * Looking at the 1981 population of the Province of Ontario alone, I see 8,625,107. At a population growth of 2% per year, we would reach 8,797,610 in 1983. Most of this population being in the heavily nuked south, we can still assume a population of about a tenth of that survived to migrate to the other areas of the province and remaining provinces that were less affected. That in itself would be 879,761 survivors to add to the eastern provinces mentioned above. And then you have to figure in the rest of the provinces, each of which only found their capitals bombed. Without doing the math, I would suggest that the total population of Canada in 2010 would be at least 3 million. I will do the math if necessary. But not right away. --SouthWriter 19:29, March 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * Silly me! I looked at the 1983DD map wrong. Anyway, the survivors of Ontario province had to go somewhere. I don't think the area has been "claimed" anyone else. Seeing that most of lower Canada is outside of the present "Canada" (though the competing "Provisional" Canada of the NAU claims a good portion. The portion of Ontario that was bombed, however, is "no man's land." By the way, it was in this region that Canada's present prime minister had taken a post at the military college at Kingston. If nothing else, Kingston survived to be absorbed in neighboring Quebec.

Taking this into account, I revise the population down to 2.5 million in 2010 --SouthWriter 19:53, March 25, 2010 (UTC)

Only Ottawa, North Bay, and Toronto were nuked, and Canada wouldn't have been a priority target except for North Bay, so it was likely smaller yield nukes. So a large portion of Southern Ontario's population would have survived, while likely the entirety of Northern Ontario would have survived. So at a population of 8.7 million, I figure about 6 million would likely survive the initial blasts in Ontario. Then say another 1.5 die from radiation, and the rest disperse into Quebec and Northern Ontario. This map shows the likely routes of refugees. I figure Owen Sound, Midland, and Sudbury would become major refugee destinations. Midland would also be rather well prepared to handle a large influx of population, being a resort town. (Wiki shows a population of 16k that rises to over 100,000 in the summer months)Oerwinde 16:02, March 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * You can't just consider radiation. There is also social disorder, famine, disease, etc.  I would probably knock of another 1.5 from that 6 mil.  Mitro 16:21, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Reorganisation of provinces
After the war with Saguenay, I was planning on changing the provinces in Canada. What would happen is this:
 * The Capital would be moved into a Federal Region centred around a city on the west coast of Newfoundland.
 * Nouveau-Quebec would be combined with Nunavut, as both have low population with lots of First Nations.
 * PEI and Nova Scotia merge to form a Maritime province, which also includes controlled parts of former New Brunswick.
 * Quebec is unchanged; though depending on what happens it may expand into the St. Lawrence.
 * The Hudson Bay region, which is under control but not really part of any province, is organised into the territory of Hudson (capital Churchill). It is not a province, it is a territory and is seen as an interim government awaiting control of more of Ontario (evidently not the Superiorian parts, as they will likely be formally ceded by treaty).

Also, if Aroostook joins, then it will get inland parts of New Brunswick, while the Maritime Province would get the coast. --DarthEinstein 22:20, September 30, 2009 (UTC)


 * The only thing I don't like is Aroostook joining Canada. Being an American, I don't enjoy seeing it be absorbed by the Canadians, and especially as a New Englander. Lahbas 01:24, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I did say if. I realise that as an American, you would not like Aroostook to join Canada, but your own Superior is getting Canada to release claims on parts of former Canada! Seems a tad hypocritical.--DarthEinstein 01:43, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I know. Just my nationalism getting in the way I guess. :) Lahbas 01:56, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * No problem. --DarthEinstein 02:00, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Remember when the "people" of Bermuda voted for a new flag? Except it was all the editors working on the TL who voted as the "people of Bermuda." Maybe something can be done similar to Aroostook since it has been mentioned before that they might hold a referendum on the issue and Aroostook is going to be a lot more pro-Canada after the war. Mitro 02:04, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I won't argue that they are Pro-Canadian, but they "were" friends of Superior before the war. Time will mend that realtionship. The only problem I see is that, despite being Pro-Canadian, it is different then actually wanting to Join Canada. I don't see a majority of people wanting to actually annex themselves as a province of Canada, though it could be a pretty sizable minority (possibly around 38-44%). Again, probably my nationalism getting in the way, by this is how I see the situation realistically as well. Lahbas 03:13, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I think this is a bit bigger than a flag, so a vote of editors might not work so well. I'm sad to say this, but the only way to decide might be through pages and pages of logic and arguement by both sides. I don't think they'll have the vote until the war is over, since either result could propel them into war. So we have until about April to decide (that's my guess of the war being finished - remember, spring comes late to Canada). Since this page is about Canada, not Aroostook, perhaps we should move this there, or to the main page.


 * Also, by Mitro's silence on the other parts of the reorganisation, can I take that as tacit approval? --DarthEinstein 03:19, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I think you overestimate how friendly Aroostook and Superior really are. From what has been written we know that Canada gave some support to Aroostook when fighting their raiders.  Meanwhile Canada is a lot closer to Aroostook then Superior is, so by geographical location alone would have a lot more influence (pre and post Doomsday), especially considering any trade or cultural contact between Superior and Aroostook would be minimal due to the distances and the state of the territory in between.  So maybe Superior and Aroostook were both happy to see two American states that survived Doomsday, but to say they were friends may be too much in diplomatic terms.  Whether they actually vote to join is a whole other story.  I agree with you it would be close vote, but I don't think Superior would have that much influence on the decision either way.  Mitro 13:27, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

I don't see PEI and Nova Scotia merging. Possibly both NS and PEI absorbing part of New Brunswick, but unless PEI is the center of power of the new province, I don't see them going along with it. And the way the Canadian constitution works, the Federal government can't decide to do it, the Provincial governments would have to agree. Honestly though, with New Brunswick not being too affected by nukes, I don't understand why it hasn't been reconfederated within the 25 years since doomsday. You would think it would have been a priority for the Canadian government. I say if you're going to create a federal district, set it up on the coast of New Brunswick, this would force some military focus on the area and possibly hasten the reconfederation of New Brunswick.--Oerwinde 08:24, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * My reason for theme merging is that if you look at population figures, you'll see that Newfoundland outnumbers any other province in this Canada. By them merging, they would hope to get more political clout. I don't think their differences are that great. The creation of a Federal district on the NB coast; I'm not sure. It would probably have to await Aroostook's decision on whether to join or not. More to the point, a capital on an island is more secure than a capital on the mainland. If they ever have another war with Saguenay/Superior, then they would be happy that their capital is safe on an island.


 * However, you are right about the federal government not being able to decide. I suppose it would have to be a series of provincial laws instead. --DarthEinstein 12:34, October 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, the big thing with PEI, is they are misproportionally represented. Population wise they should have 2 seats in the house of commons, but they have 4, and 2 senators. Merging them would lose them their expanded influence. However if you want to make the federal district an island, how about just the whole of PEI? Can't have much more influence than being the capital.--Oerwinde 15:39, October 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I actually decided that the provincial electoral districts were used by the post-Doomsday federal government, then adjusted to keep proportion. The reason for this was that to use the federal ridings would yield approximately 27 ridings! Obviously not enough. So PEI wouldn't have its extra representation. However, moving the capital to PEI might work; especially as Charlottetown is the "Birthplace of Confederation". --DarthEinstein 21:15, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Manitoba
Whatever happened to the Province of Manitoba? I would say that the southwestern corner, being near Minot AFB would have been contaminated, and the capital, Winnipeg, might have been a target (being the link between eastern and western Canada) but waht about the rest? Tbguy1992 17:25, October 15, 2009 (UTC)


 * Strange thing is, we haven't talked about Manitoba much. The north east coast (on Hudson Bay) is controlled by Canada, and Winnipeg was definitely hit. This is being discussed on another page, so go to this page to see what people have said.

Thatcher
Margaret Thatcher was in Ottowa on Doomsday, and we've recently discovered that she survived and headed east, toward the Maritime Provinces. Did she play any role in the formation of the new Canada? Depending on Canadians' feelings toward her, she could have been a good choice for  Deputy GG in 1986, which means she would have served as Governor General for at least a little while after the death of her predecessor. Could she, say, have served 1990-1991, stepping down in favor of a native-born Canadian? Benkarnell 20:57, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea. --DarthEinstein 21:08, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * What do you think she would do after she stepped down? --DarthEinstein 21:22, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see why she would be a part of the Canadian government. Possibly if she was naturalised, but she likely would just be treated as a foreign dignitary for the first years.--Oerwinde 06:52, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * What was Canada's status in regards to its relationship with Britain in 1983? Would there have been any legal or moral obligation to accept Thatcher as head of state of Canada when the Canadian leadership died? She could have at least served the fledgling Canadian government in an advisory capacity.--BrianD 13:04, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * 1983 was right after the final step in Canadian independance; that is, the constitution ceased to be a British law in 1982, and a new constitution was brought into effect (sadly without Quebec agreeing...). I doubt she would have to become head of state, but the Governor General doesn't have many real powers. Personally I think she would be a fine candidate for the job, symbolising the ties Canada still has to Britain. She might even give the new government some sort of legitimacy. Or not, I'm not sure. --DarthEinstein 16:31, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * The connection to Britain is somewhat celebrated in Canada: with Britain out of the picture, naming Thatcher might seem like a nice gesture. How about this: she was made Deputy Governor in an informal, provisional sense before the new COnstitution was passed making her the successor.  Paddon simply needed someone to help him, and she was it.  After the new constitution, she planned to step down in favor of a native-born Canadian as soon as the opportunity presented itself.  In the crisis atmosphere, this never happened, and she was the constitutional successor after Paddon's somewhat unexpected death.  She took her job seriously, and in the name of stability she didn't retire for a couple of years, when she finally made good on her promise to step aside for a born-and-bred Canadian.  Benkarnell 20:28, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Okay, that all sounds good.

But, after being involved in the Canadian government, where would she go? Would she settle down, or go to the Celtic Alliance, or somewhere else? I actually have no idea. --DarthEinstein 03:45, October 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * England is long gone, but I wonder if she might consider New Britain?--BrianD 03:57, October 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think its likely she would stay in Canada. With England gone and her work in Canada, it would be likely she would settle.--Oerwinde 09:19, October 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, too. She might be fairly well traveled, especially in the mid 90s, before she got really old.  But if I were her, I'd be retiring in Canada, where I had lived so many years and had helped so much.  Ireland is nice, but not home.  And the African bush - I couldn't imagine a less tranquil place to retire!  Benkarnell 12:49, October 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * So, in the 90s then, she would act as an ambassador perhaps, then settle in Newfoundland. I chose Newfoundland because quite a bit of its population is of English descent, and most of the rest comes from other parts of Britain. Wait, I just got an idea -- could she go on the Royal Navy tour of the early 90s, as an official ambassador? --DarthEinstein 14:57, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Latest edit/Halifax
Someone needs to undo the latest edit, making Halifax the largest city in Canada. Good reminder to everyone, including new editors, to read the article and background for it before making changes.--BrianD 03:08, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * I reverted the edit. Brian, feel free to revert edits that you feel are wrong, you don't need to ask someone to do it for you.  Mitro 03:25, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't know I had the power :) --BrianD 03:42, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
 * The force is strong in this one. Mitro 03:46, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

Ya know, as this thing grows there's more and more of a sense among people that some of us are the bosses. Only XiReney has ever asked for any oversight authority, on account of being the one who started it. The widely held notion that only certain people can revert or archive makes me afraid of what would happen if, say, Mitro and I took a vacation at the same time. Let me declare, openly and once again: I'm not the boss of you. Benkarnell 03:56, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

Controlled Territory
I'm thinking 25 years after doomsday quite a bit of the less civilized claimed territory would be under full Canadian control, such as northern Manitoba and Ontario. As long as you have communications, it doesn't take a lot to keep sparsely populated territory under control. With technology levels at a point where wireless communication is starting to become commonplace, it doesn't seem likely that these areas would remain independant. I would also think re-establishing sovereignty over their claimed territory would be a priority for the Canadian government. I also don't see why the New Brunswick area has remained outside Canadian control for so long.

Maybe once the Saguenay war is over the Canada First party could begin agressive re-integration of Ontario, Manitoba and New Brunswick?--Oerwinde 09:04, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

New Brunswick is in fact mostly under Canadian control, and a recreation of their provincial government has been under way. Once that's done it'll be promoted to a province. Or possibly integrated with Nova Scotia. I haven't decided yet. Parts of northern Manitoba and Ontario are in fact under control - those are also administered directly by the federal government. And yes I was planning for a wave of Canadian expansion after the war, but I was thinking in the direction of the St. Lawrence River. --DarthEinstein 17:05, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, was mostly going off the map, which has very little of Ontario and Manitoba under control, as well as almost none of New Brunswick. With New Brunswick mostly unaffected by the nuclear strikes on Doomsday, combining NB with Nova Scotia would make it the most populous of the provinces considering the major reason it had been uncontrolled for so long was instability due to large numbers of American refugees. I would keep it separate.

And in the 26 years since the Canadian federal government controlled Manitoba, Assinboia had develpoed its own identity and are fiercely independant. A large portion of the population is too bitter at the Canadian's abandonment of Manitoba to even consider reuniting with Canada. When contact is reestablished with Canada, the "loyalists" would probbably leave with the Canadians. This, ironically mirrors the United Empire Loyalists leaving the new United States for the British colonies that would become Canada. --Yankovic270 20:47, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I expect Canada to essentially control Manitoba north of Lake Winnepeg with Assiniboia controlling the south. Though from the sound of it Alberta and Saskatchewaan will likely rejoin Canada--Oerwinde 21:01, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of Assiniboia, I expect that they would attempt to take over as much territory as possible before Canada returns to the area. --Yankovic270 21:16, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * Northward expansion would be limited by Winnepeg's bomb though.


 * Are you sure that Alberta and Saschatchawan (hate spelling that name) will join Canada? They have been a part of the NAU for a LONG time now, annd may have evolved divided loyalties. Lahbas 21:35, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

They allready avoid the former city of Winnipeg, and the area arround it. It is an Exclusion Zone simmilar to that of Chernobyl. And I would think that the Assiniboians would attempt to get a favorable position of power in the region, which might incude trying to be less surronded by soon-to-be Canadian territory. --Yankovic270 21:48, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Theoretically, I think Canada's furthest extent would be the territories (perhaps not all of them), parts of northern BC, northern Alberta, northern Saskatchewan, northern Manitoba, northern Ontario, perhaps also eastern Ontario, most of Quebec except for Saguenay controlled bits, the rest of New Brunswick if Aroostook joins, and what they have now. This is not a short-term estimate - I think that at the least this extent would take about twenty more years. But much of it, including the eastern parts, would be taken sooner. "Loyalist" people would resettle in Canada or learn to live in their respective nations. However I don't think that these nations would hate Canada. They would understand that they would not be able to help. Indeed, the "Canada" we're talking about happens to carry the name, but all of these survivor states are successors to Canada and its provinces to some degree. I also think that the Assiniboians would be able to expand north of Winnipeg. Winnipeg was the only impact in Manitoba, after all. --DarthEinstein 01:01, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * The NAU page says the Canadian Provisional Government of Alberta and Saskatchewaan is hoping to negotiate reconfederation with Canada. With the NAU being more of an alliance and economic zone than a nation, and the former provinces being administered as a placeholder until reconfederation, I would see them maintaining their Canadian identity and rejoining Canada. So I anticipate all of Saskatchewaan rejoining Canada except maybe some territory claimed by Assiniboia, most of Alberta except maybe the Peace River region, which I might have join Prince George in the future, the territories except maybe parts of the Yukon which likely would have joined Alaska by the time Canadian attention gets there, northern Manitoba, and most of Ontario.--Oerwinde 08:23, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Capital
I think we should change the capital from St. John's to Charlottetown. Charlottetown seems like a more plausible capital because it is were confederation was signed and created, and thus would be symbolic city for Canada. DjBarca
 * This was already discussed further up the page. I think its a good idea as well. Maybe making Charlottetown the discussed federal district and combining PEI with New Brunswick when it reconfederates.--Oerwinde 08:23, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * However before that happens, the war must end. I doubt they would change their capital during the worst military crisis they've experienced in 26 years! --DarthEinstein 14:19, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

New map of former USA and Canada:
i created a new map to paste in there all new norther america nation, because we know limit inter brasil-venezuela, but what is the fontier canada-superior? where is easter texas? delmarva and virgina are in the same place? Dineta have sea cost? who of them have contact to great mexican republic? i paste North American Union in blue, around whyomyn, add your country and upload a new version of that file, i was count 23 entities in former USA and Canada, where?--Fero 01:22, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Assiniboia has most of Manitoba, except for the Hudson Bay coast. Virginia has a good chunk of Southeast Ohio, most of Virginia, all of West Virginia and all of Maryland not under Delmarva control. And Lincoln has all of Nebraska not under NAU control. --Yankovic270 01:32, November 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * okey, you can paint the map to we all read that easyly and clearly--Fero 02:24, November 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * look this, is relevant--Fero 02:53, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yankovic, after reading the discussion about Virginia's borders, I think the general consensus is that you're waaaaaaaay too optimistic, and Virginia as it stands would be hard pressed to control ONE of the three territories you say it's claimed - let alone all three. There's just too much population in that area for an easy assertion of control. Louisiannan 20:02, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

You can look at the map on the West Texas page for the borders of east and west Texas, relative to the former TTL (current OTL) state of Texas. If I can find a free equivalent of MS Paint for Mac OS X, I'll add Texas/Vermont/northern townships to the map.--BrianD 04:50, November 24, 2009 (UTC)


 * I've added Utah and adjusted borders. From the Utah article, we know also that there are City-States in Idaho that aren't part of the NAU or Deseret.  We also know that there is some sort of government centered around Spokane. Louisiannan 23:56, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me, but as I said on the discussion for the new Virginian flag, I have absolutely no artistic talent. The maps I created were with MS Paint, and Virginia's borders aren't exactly easy to plot. Yankovic270 00:08, November 25, 2009 (UTC)