Arstarpool - this proposal actually conflicts with the prior existing Sierra Nevada suggested by fxgentleman. This either needs to be rectified to fit the QSS of the timeline, or it needs to be retracted (although I appreciate the effort!) Louisiannan 23:00, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out to me! I decided to move the location to the western coastline to avoid complications. If there are any Cali residents out there, (or anyone who has extensive knowledge of the area, please point out any useful tidbits i can use to help, and feel free to help further expand this proposal Arstarpool 23:38, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm really starting to fear we're reaching what Mitro called the "Plausibility Singularity", beyond which almost any new republics or commonwealths are not plausible. Especially in the West, which is supposed to be such a wasteland. I don't want to rain on this, but if the West gets any more full, it's going to get hard to take this whole "apocalypse" thing seriously. Benkarnell 23:59, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
The idea of the state being in the northernmost reaches of the state of California also conflicts with canon. It is well-known canon that the area that you say is part of the state of California is actually part of the Municipal States of the Pacific. The place I selected for it has no current states in it, and the FEMA map has it being target free. And I don't think we are reaching the plausibility singularity. That is still, hopefully, far away. The state of California is the largest state in the US population wise, and the third largest in area. There are just as many opportunities for survivors as any other state. And could you please try to play nice with the other children Ben?
Yankovic270 00:29, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
I would rather have the nation assume the name "California Republic", for the nation that existed briefly before statehood.
Yankovic270 00:36, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Ben. With there being an organized presence on pretty much every state, I think we have room for maybe.... 3 more nations in America. And to Yank's suggestion, I had pondered on naming it the California Republic, and dont get me wrong, it sounds pretty cool, but one thing I frequently notice in this little dystopia is the abundance of "Republics". The Republic of Lakota, the Virginian Republic, the Republic of South Florida, and many others seem to taint the originality of the post-Doomsday nations. I chose to name it the Commonwealth of California because I aimed at originality rather than comformity. However, looking at this, I realize that the word "Commonwealth" is most frequently used in relation to Australia and New Zealand. If you have any other ideas on names, holler out. Arstarpool 01:04, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
The location of the country in the map doesn't have a coast, and thus the Californians would not have a navy of any kind.
Yankovic270 01:31, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
Mmkay. Arstarpool 01:39, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
- The USA has a history of Commonwealths, so the name's not so bad. The problem, as I see it, is that individually there's nothing whatsoever wrong with all of these Republics and so forth, but collectively they result in a world that is very far from the one presented in the general narrative. We end up saying, "The US is a wasteland where brutal warlords roam the scarred countryside. Where are they? Somewhere in between all these pleasant democracies that fill the entire map." We're simply at the point where more nations, especially positive, stable ones, aren't going to be easy to fit in. Nobody's fault. But it's where we're at now, in my judgment. Benkarnell 02:58, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, Ben. I think we've hit saturation point. Louisiannan 14:20, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
I have already moved on from North America. I have started creating articles for the nations people ignorre.
Yankovic270 15:00, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
To use a chliche: We have a situation on our hands! The plausibility singularity for North America has been reached!HAD 16:47, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
great page caint wait for more.Wingman1 17:59, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
Plausibility singularity, eh? I can't really argue on this one. If you look at the map, there is a nation on every corner of the continent. From the Alaskan Free State to the Republic of South Florida, what was supposed to be a wastleand has turned into a collection of jolly old communities. Would it be safe to say that this article will be marked as obsolete? If there is any changes I may make so it may be closer to canon, please let me know. If not, whatever. Arstarpool 23:04, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
After looking at the map for a good five minutes, I realized that the former U.S. is not as filled to the brim as many of us are saying. If you take the map, take out the names of all the nations, you will see that there is plently of room for the thieves, rapists, and warlords to scavenge, as well as room for hopeful, optimistic nations to grow.
Arstarpool 23:11, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
- As long as we leave something to the thieves and rapists ;). No, I understand that it's not as ridiculous as some of us have been intimating. I think it's more that lots of us suddenly realized that we've been looking at each new idea individually and missing the big picture - and are now questioning our whole thought process for the last few months.
- The fact that this is California, though, does put it in a special place, because it's been long held as axiomatic that the West was particularly hard-hit, not just by the bombs, but also by the societal breakdown that followed. The MSP was created as an alliance between walled cities with little to no democracy, and we've long had the assumption that the MSP was the most developed state in the region. Benkarnell 00:45, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
I am attempting to place this state in a pocket of California that was free of any potential FEMA targets, but the author of the article has it set in his mind to include the portion of California that is undoubtably part of the MSP. I will adopt it if the author proves uncooperative when it comes to plausibility.
Yankovic270 23:31, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Im fine with the location being changed, and I don't have it NEAR MSP land right now. If you think there is a more suitable spot for the area, feel free to change it on my behalf. Arstarpool 23:41, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
Thieves and rapists tend to be the people least likely to create a meaningful, permanent civilization. I would naturally assume that these types would either wander the countryside in semi-nomadic tribes/hordes, or packing their bags for Santa Cruz. Just not creating anything of their own.
Yankovic270 01:38, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Nobody ever said that the thieves and rapists were starting a "meaningful" civillization, Yank. Arstarpool 03:13, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
By my definition "meaningful civilization" means any nation or culture that can stand the test of time. How it is ruled is irrelevant, as long as the state survives it is meaningful. Apart from the bandits in eastern Canada, and the states of Santa Cruz and Ventura, mostly the barbarian types stay in a nomadic raider lifestyle. In my book you need to be stationary to be called a civilization/nation/state, and most modern barbarians aren't patient enough to stay in one place long.
Yankovic270 04:07, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
Besides, they can have the no-man's-land in between the survivor states. I doubt roving bands of outlaws need much living sppace.
Yankovic270 04:09, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, nomads need more space. And history shows us lots and lots of vicious nations that stuck around for a long, long time. Benkarnell 05:24, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Would it be safe to say this article may one day graduate to canon, then? Arstarpool 02:36, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
I sure hope so, especially after all that effort on my part to make it more plausible.
Yankovic270 02:45, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
Okay, who the hell marked it obsolete? Arstarpool 23:22, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
I concur. The fat lady hasn't even begun her warm-up yet. And I thought my changes had made it more plausible. I think that this nation definitely deserves to be canonized.
Yankovic270 01:23, May 1, 2010 (UTC)
Since most post-Doomsday countries have to "pump it to town" on non-gasoline powered fuels, and seeing that most of the countries that do have oil stretch it to extreme measures (except for Alaska, maybe, who is rich in the black goo), how would this affect Cali? While looking up on Google, I happened to found out that there are several oil deposits near the area, but, could they be discovered, or more importantly, used in a post-Doomsday scenario? Arstarpool 02:09, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
I am putting working on this nation aside until New Rome is canonized, then Tuscany, and the removal of Wisconsin as a stub. Anyone may be free to edit this page under the condition that they do not make drastic changes. Arstarpool 22:54, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
Would it be too much if I wrote in that the governor, the lieutenant govenor, or some of his staff ended up alive in Placerville? Arstarpool 05:50, July 21, 2010 (UTC)
- Do some research, Alex. But writers should not force such things. If you can't find thes officials in the record, and can find some feasable reason they should make it to Placerville, then go with it. But if you find them in bombed areas, then forget them. If you can't find a feasable reason why they would find their way to Placerville, then go with the local officials in the surviving counties. SouthWriter 06:06, July 21, 2010 (UTC)
It would be pretty logical since they would have most definitely heard of the attacks of Hawaii and Alaska via shortwave radio that they would be given time to escape. Arstarpool 18:00, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, they would not have had to depend on shortwave radio. The warnings were on the air up until the EMP blasts in space over Colorado and Illinois. Governors and their staffs would have been hightailing it out of towns all over the country, assuming the worst for their cities. In Wyoming the Governor and Lt. Governor left by different routes and met in a prearranged spot. In Georgia, Governor Barnes stayed on CB radios that operated a little longer, but at the cost of his life. Lt. Governor Miller, on the other hand, escaped to Rome, Ga.
- To add plausibility to your story, I'd have the government officials meet in an agreed upon place. Then they could rebuild what parts of the state they could.
- But don't think you are getting away with this ploy, Alex. Your original proposal had local officials in survival mode. You are now recreating the situation in neighboring Nevada, where the government survives and rallies nearby refugees behind the idea of reviving as much of the state as possible. You need to hold off making these changes until you have come out with a mediated agreement. --SouthWriter 19:18, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
You replaced the template after I removed it, and then you take it away again???
It is not my place to put the banner up - but Zack said it should be put up while the article is under review. He also said it was okay that I put it up when I did (even though I took it down). The proper precedure is for "Proposal" to be posted when an article goes up for arbitration. I will stay out of it. The article will have to be changed, though, if and when the Brass decides the issue.SouthWriter 06:20, July 21, 2010 (UTC)
No it is not. A proposal article has dragged THREE articles down. The Brass has been involved once already. His "article" has led to countless fights. I will not subject to the authorities of those who do not hold any power over my article (everyone except me and Yank). I went through the LEGIT PROPOSAL PROCESS. It is too bad that nobody objected when I asked any objections? I gave the community NINE DAYS to find that little error, and as me and Yank have stated, the Canon one always wins.
I am done with this. Arstarpool 06:37, July 21, 2010 (UTC)
The MapDon't look now, but your map concedes more than your arguments do. You give up the whole Lake Tahoe area, including South Lake Tahoe (apparently your modern transportation hub. I overlaid your map on a "google earth" map to verify this. SouthWriter 19:19, July 23, 2010 (UTC)
A mistake on my part. Arstarpool 19:23, July 23, 2010 (UTC)
Indeed! But then, Lake Tahoe is indeed RIGHT AT the bend, which you consciously had to go around when you drew the map. If I were you, I'd go south, along the valley, and exploit the lush farmland for all its worth. The battle over a little airport town (South Lake Tahoe) is hardly worth it. Think survival, not conquest - or even "honor" (protecting the historic boundaries). I've changed the map a little, making some notations. SouthWriter 19:56, July 23, 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Arstar. I noticed that you have not removed South Lake Tahoe and the airport there from the article. These are not part of California due to their being on the east slopes of the Sierra Nevadas and close to the Lake Tahoe community. If you remove them, your article can be graduated. If you do not respond to this, I can do it for you. How about it? SouthWriter 03:16, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
I want to change the name: the current one sounds too much like the Virginian Republic.
Arstarpool 00:27, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
Vallejo and Moffett Field
Hi, I'm a new user and I've been working on a San Francisco Bay Area page. The post-DD City By The Bay is not a pretty picture - I didn't realize how many juicy targets there were in the neighborhood! I hope to have it ready for proposal status soon. I'm also a Bay Area native, and I have a couple of suggestions regarding this article:
1) Vallejo as the new capitol - it's next to the Mare Island Naval Shipyard which was active in 1983 and would be a likely target. I might recommend Sonoma (another former state capitol) or Napa as possible alternatives for reconstruction in the Bay Area. Fairfield and Vacaville are near Travis AFB, and Santa Rosa would be in trouble as both a moderately large city and a former regional Civil Defense headquarters. CD was replaced by FEMA in 1972, but I suspect Soviet target lists are like no-fly lists - once you're on, it's hard to get off. Alternately, the nuke destined for Mare Island could miss to the west, damaging the base and forcing the abandonment of Vallejo but not destroying the city outright.
2) Moffett Federal Airfield as a source of salvaged airplanes - it actually would have been called Moffett Field or NAS Moffett Field at the time. More significantly, however, is that is is a likely first strike target (as a major airfield and base for P-3 Orion anti-sub patrols) and is literally next door to an even more important target - the Air Force Satellite Control Facility (aka "The Blue Cube") where most of the nation's spy satellites were managed. The Soviets would likely spare no effort to burn the Cube down to the bedrock, and Moffett would go with it.
Anyway, cheers and keep on alt-historicating!
Allium74 06:01, August 16, 2010 (UTC)
How did California absorb Yuma County? Yuma County is in Arizona, which is far away from Northern California
Enclavehunter 23:52, October 5, 2011 (UTC)
Spelling mistake by the author, was meant to be Yuba County.
@ Older post: The city is already covered, if you'd have bothered to read the article. As for Moffett, it was not hit directly, only heavily damaged in a strike on Mountain View. And the "Cube"? There is no reason to hit that - ignoring that the atmospheric EMP killed the satellites, they would be useless in a nuclear war or its aftermath.
Lordganon 00:07, October 6, 2011 (UTC)
Is it alright for me to change Yuma County to Yuba County? Enclavehunter 04:58, October 28, 2011 (UTC)
What is the future of the California? Just wondering. Enclavehunter 06:51, January 29, 2012 (UTC)
Long-term, I know Arstar is going to have it join up with the new USA. Short-term.... well, he'd be willing to listen to ideas, as would I. Lordganon 07:49, January 29, 2012 (UTC)
Butte County, California
What has become of Butte County? From the maps I studied, it would be situated between California Republic and Municipal States of the Pacific. Cities include Chico, Oroville (my place of birth), Biggs, Gridley, and Paradise. I suspect the ghost town of Hamilton would become populated once again. Here is a link to the Wikipedia page for the county: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butte_County,_California
From what I can tell, there are five options: California Republic, Municipal States of the Pacific, divided between CR and MSP, becomes its own country, or got nuked (Russians must really hate university students if they'd nuke Chico). Experiment632 (talk) 20:41, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
I have relatives there and have visited the area quite a few time. The you might be able to convince people to allow those areas not annexed to the other countries on the maps (or ask for border adjustments) to be turned into some sort of buffer state. There is a dam that I believe had a flooded city at the bottom of the lake and some deep caverns used by the Knights of Columbus that might be useful for people to hide around. Also plenty of agriculture concerns there owned by Mormons that might connect them to Utah.
Going by the map - mildly outdated, as noted before - half of that county is in the MSP, and a small amount is part of the CR.
No way that there is a state there, or connections to Utah.
2003 Soviet invasion fear
Maybe a small element of truth to that false rumor could be added. A Soviet submarine low on food and supplies is forced to park just off the West Coast. There is an encounter between the Soviet sailors and people living in a small coastal community. The Siberians are able to reason with the residents and there is talk of trade. However when it is learned that the submarine was actually a missile sub that took part in the nuclear attack on America, the villagers quickly turn on their guests. Most of the sailors are lynched. However a few of them manage to escape. The community leadership puts a price on their heads and spreads word to the surrounding communities. This leads to a misunderstanding that the Soviet Union had begun a full scale invasion of North America. Experiment632 (talk) 04:09, January 4, 2014 (UTC)