Is there any reason why the Lake Arthur Parish should be attempting an independent existence apart from the state of Louisiana? I'd think that since it was almost wiped out by the hurricane in 2005, recieving aid from not only Louisianna but, most recently, the League of Nations, that it would gladly become part of Louisiana. SouthWriter 18:07, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

How does the article state this? The info box lists it as Lake Arthur Parish, and the article lists it as part of Louisiana. Perhaps the confusion comes from the existence of the article itself: originally, when I began to work on the WCRB article - before you got here, incidentially - I tried to work within the loose guidelines the other editors here at the time thought the South would be like. I came up with Lake Arthur as being pretty much the biggest and likely only survivor community in the former state. Of course, I soon wrote up Louisiana, which was graciously graduated into canon. To set the record straight: Lake Arthur is part of Louisiana. There are likely some areas in which it is more self-sufficient than dependent on outside help, due to roads to and from Lafayette and Monroe and regional nations not being nearly as plentiful and maintained as they are in OTL. But don't take that to mean Lake Arthur is its own nation. BrianD 18:51, August 27, 2010 (UTC)

The info box was still listing its "independence" being declared in 1995, I think. And it is still listed seperately on the nations profile page. I posted this inquiry before reviewing the Louisiana article, where it is very clear that Lake Arthur is part of the nation-state. So I guess I can take Lake Arthur off the nations profile page, since it plainly is not a nation. SouthWriter 20:05, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
I see you did some work on the article since I was there. Good work. It looks like Lake Arthur will make a great addition to Louisiana. The Parish is, after all, the access to the Caribbean. SouthWriter 20:16, August 27, 2010 (UTC)


I changed the Info box to reflect Lake Arthur's status within the state of Lousiana. I also noted that the OTL equivalent is best seen in the Wikipedia artile Acadiana, the region of Louisiana west of New Orleans and all the way to Texas. This area would most likely be those that crowded into the town of Lake Arthur as they began to shelter refugees.

They had a flag and "official" recognition before Doomsday. They were, after all, known world-wide as "Cajuns." It might be nice to write an independence movement into the history of Lake Arthur. It might help explain the official's lie to the WCRB about being the "legitimate" government of Louisiana. SouthWriter 23:39, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

What do you think would compel them to desire independence from Lafayette? I've always thought of the official as an opportunistic goober (well, after I decided to make Lake Arthur one of many, and not the only, survivor community in Louisiana). BrianD 00:24, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Well, since the survivor community along the coast (perhaps even with a government official among them) was not discovered until 1987 - about four years after Doomsday, perhaps the ethnic Cajuns had much going for them. I can imagine a vocal minority would indeed wish to remain free of the state government that had let them down in time of need (endemic, consider Gov. Blanco's response to Katrina in 2005 OTL). The Cajuns are proud of their heritage, as the legislature of the state had already acknowledged in approving the Flag. It is not as embarassing as the "Southern Mafia," but it could be a sticking point for a few years as the new government of the rebuilt nation-state. It has the advantage over the mafia in that it is an ethnic group that is well known and respected (if for nothing else, its food!).

I don't mean that anything should change the accepted storyline (you've done a good job), but just add a little local color to the otherwise general article (culture section not withstanding). The story of the survivors, prior to their discovery, could be of a rising pride in their history. A feeling of despair probably would have held sway among some as horror stories of survivors from Baton Rouge, New Orleans and Lake Charles. Joy over seeing explorers from cities better off than them would have been enough for all but the die hard Cajun nationalist (of whom a handful remained to bring the issue up when they could. The "goober" you say mislead the internationalists (he probably never liked the United Nations anyway) could have been one of them. SouthWriter 01:43, September 6, 2010 (UTC)


I'd like to adopt this article. Mscoree (talk) 20:08, February 12, 2014 (UTC)

You'll need to speak with the orgional author about that. Zack 20:17, February 12, 2014 (UTC)

This is a creation of BrianD, who recently officially retired, leaving his extensive writings up for adoption.  Go to his talk page, though, for the details. SouthWriter (talk) 20:06, February 13, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I have requested to adopt a few of BrianD's articles following his retirement. Mscoree (talk) 20:22, February 13, 2014 (UTC)

I must object to the concept of Ms doing such strenuously. Same rationale as before. Lordganon (talk) 13:57, February 15, 2014 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.