Talk: Russian America

Winner of the 2017 Stirling Award for Timeline of the Year in 2016!

• Talk:Wilt of the Carnation (Merged into Russian America in 2018)

Some new ideas

I have some new ideas for the timeline. None of which are canon, but I want to figure them out before I finalize any.

• With a greater Russian presence in North America, the US would have to abandon all their movements westward. Because of which, the US would move southward, annexing Cuba, Hispaniola, Puerto Rico, among others. The US would also help to create a "sphere of influence" in the region (much like Cuba in OTL). The US would assist in the Canadian rebellions and the Texas revolution.
  • Canada: I am not too sure if I really want to take an idea from the Maple Uprising timeline, but I can see this escalating into a similar outcome. Upper and Lower Canada gain independence. English speaking UC (OTL Ontario) is annexed into the US (or remains under British control), while LC (OTL Quebec) becomes a pro-American "Republic of Canada." The Maritime Provinces become a Dominion of the UK, while the remaining portions of Canada continue to be under British control. Again, I really don't want to take the ideas from another timeline, but this is an idea I had.
  • Texas: Texas would gain their independence as in OTL, but the US is reluctant to annex the nation. After years of waiting, Texas gets quite comfortable being their own nation.

Nations list quicky ideas

Here are a couple of ideas I have for several nations in TTL, giving a quick history.

• Alaska: You can guess
• Canada: TTL Canada would be more like OTL Quebec. The Canadian rebellions would be taken seriously by the US and would allow the two Canadas to become independent. Upper Canada (OTL Ontario) would be annexed into the US, while Lower Canada (Quebec and Labrador) would become the "Republic of Canada."
• Borealia: Rupert's Land and the Arctic Islands (which remain British) are united to form the Dominion of Borealia. It acts much like OTL Canada.
• Acadia: Or the "Maritimes Union," would be an autonomous Dominion of the UK, made up of the Maritime Provinces and includes Newfoundland Island. This would be this timeliness "Canadian Confederation."
• United States: The US would much like OTL. Excluding the area gained by the Texas annexation, California, and Oregon. It would expand north to include Upper Canada, and south to include Cuba, Hispaniola, and Puero Rico.
• West Indies Federation: With greater US presence in TTL, the WIF would remain intact.
• Texas: Texas would gain its independence as in OTL, but the US would be more reluctant to annex the republic, because it would lead to not only war with Mexico, but maybe Russia.
• Mexico: Mexico includes the border it originally had, excluding Texas and Central America. It would be a commonwealth of Russia up until the late 1870s.
• Belize and the Mosquito Coast: With greater US presence in the Caribbean, and loosing the two Canadas, the UK would be more defiant in keeping its claims here. Belize already exists in OTL, but the Mosquito Coast would also exist as a nation.
• United Provinces of Central America: Or whatever they want to call themselves, would remain in a federation, in fear that the pro-Russian Mexico would annex them again.
• Colombia: With Spain humiliated by the loss to Russia and Mexico, the independence movement for Colombia would gain greater moral by the Colombians. Because of which, Bolivar's "Gran Colombia" would remain a federal nation, even expanding to include more states.

--NuclearVacuum (Talk) 01:02, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Update on Texas. I am rethinking that the Texas Revolution would be a failed rebellion in TTL. However, it would be movements such as Texas and other secessionist movements in Mexico that would lead to a successful Mexican Federation. I will still need to work out the Mexican states, but Mexico would actually be an important and rich nation in TTL (as opposed to the chaos in Mexico today). --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:57, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

A few thoughts:

• Is it possible that Labrador would be part of the Maritimes Union as well as Newfoundland??
• If not could there be some form of secessionist movement within Labrador to join the MU??
• Would there still be an American Civil War?? Verence71 10:56, June 22, 2011 (UTC)

Mosquito Coast

At the moment I am creating a proposal page for Mosquito Coast and was wondering if you could add the following: The Cabezas Incident; it is a failed attempt by the former nation of Nicaragua/ before becoming part of the Federal Republic of Central America/ to annex Mosquito Coast. Great Britian, refusing to let such a thing happen, reinforces its colony with millitary personel. This is actualy an POD from OTL since Mosquito Coast is actualy annexed with Britian doing nothing about it (for some reason, apparently) For more info on the real event, just go look up Mosquito Coast yourself (was I being rude there?). BlackSkyEmpire 20:39, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Wow, very nice. Please, feel free to work on it. I have been fascinated with the Mosquito Coast for a while now (primarily since it has the word "Mosquito" in it XD). Interesting POD. That is exactly what I was hopping would happen in TTL. You say it gains its independence? You mean it becomes a republic? Wow, now I am really interested. If you are interested in making a new flag for this, I have an idea for a flag with a mosquito on it (just popped in my head). No need to be sorry, you were only making a statement. That is the only flaw of the internet, you can't decipher ones expression. But anyway, have fun. I can't wait to see what you have in mind. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 02:49, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

POD proposal

Here is an prposal; it is a fragment of my opinion on how the Russians expand from Fort Ross: In OTL, Ivan Kuscov, founder of Fort Ross, failed to set up a settlement in Bodega Bay (in which he managed to proove was crawling with many Beavers and Otters; He actualy managed to bring back many beaver skins and 1,160 otter pelts!!). But what if Ivan manages to convince some of the local Russians at Fort Ross to settle there with there families and friends and to take advantage of the wildlife? Let us find out: After succesfully managing some local Russians into settling at the bay, Ivan returns to Russia where he publishes a book called Новая Земля, Новые Возможности (New Land, New Opportunities) in which tells the reader of the beauties, marvels, and opportunities of the land around Fort Ross. Ivan's book becomes very popular following its publication due to Ivans ability to "Express the world around him and giving a accurate and exciting view of what land in America is like. By 1813, Fort Ross has transformed from a small trading post to a large settlement with a small cluster of towns around the area as well; Ivan now is very popular and known across Russia (In fact, a few months before his death, Ivan would actualy be visited by the king of Russia; Alexander the I). Later in that year, Ivan led an hiking expedition from Fort Ross into OTL Sacramento Valley; Ivan later described the area as shown: "There miles of plains beyond the eye could see or the legs could travel and beyond that where mountians reaching far into the heavens; never in my life has such beauty been beheld before my eyes, I will remember it as long as I live". After returning to Fort Ross, Ivan would continute to lead eleven more trips across the land; he would travel across most of OTL California with only the edges of and southern area of OTL California unexplored by him. In 1825 Ivan Kuscov would die by natural causes; he will forever be remembered as the pioneer of California.

The Importance and Growth of Alaska

In OTL, Alexander Andreyevich Baranov was rumourd to have transferred money to the U.S. under his name, he was later removed in which destroyed Russia's chance to expand; but what if Alexander managed to eliminate the rumours and proove himself innocent?? Let us explore this as well:

(Sorry, I will do more work tommorrow, but I hope you enjoyed this whole thing so far. :) ) BlackSkyEmpire 02:21, February 4, 2011 (UTC)BlackSkyEmpire

Reply to all

Sorry for the delay, but I have been sick these couple of days. But I have read both of your of your suggestions. I am really amazed and intrigued at the idea. My interests were set primarily at politics, I never really read much about Baranov of Kuskov. Those two divergence would make great PODs. With Kuskov persuading more to go to the Ross Colony, and Baranov remaining Governor of Russian America, this may persuade Spain to act violently to secure their interests in America, leading to war and a Russo-Mexican alliance. Very interesting. Sorry, sill a little sick, so I can't think of any way else to express my approval. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 21:48, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

More updates

Here are a couple updates, plus some key events in Alaskan history that I have been too busy and preoccupied to state yet.

• Colombia: With the moral or Royalists loosing in Mexico and Oregon, moral would rise for the other independence movements in the Americas. Colombia would be an interesting difference from OTL, as with Spain moving most of its supplies towards the joint war with Russia and Mexico, Colombia would be able to defend themselves with relative ease (compared to OTL). Despite some fear of the Russians, many Colombians believed that they were a blessing in disguise. Not only that, Bolivar would even make comments towards Royalists that he would seek Russian assistance if Spain continued to fight. Because of this, Bolivar's "Gran Colombia" would be allowed to remain a federation, without fear from external forces. Despite a minor border dispute between Mexico and the UK, Colombia would be able to retain its original border, and would be able to grow. With more success in Colombia, and possibly from fear of the Russian presents, Peru and Bolivia would not alienate themselves from Colombia, allowing them to become part of a greater federation. I'm still working out a possible map, but I predict it would retain the original three provinces, plus Bolivia (called Bolivar in TTL), Peru, and maybe Panama would gain "departmenthood."
• Russian-American telegraph: I predict that the Russo-American relations would be much friendlier after the 1850s and 1860s. Because of this, plus with an American presence in Russian America, the Russian-America telegraph would not only be complete, it may in fact beat the Trans-Atlantic telegraph to become the first telegraph to connect North America to Europe.
• Trans-Alaskan pipeline: I am not much into oil, but this would play an important role in the Alaskan economy and history. I will need to do more research on it before I can determine if there are any changes.

That's all for now. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 15:46, February 9, 2011 (UTC)

Oblasts to states

Just something I have been deciding on for weeks now. I believe it seems more likely that Alaska would be made up of states rather than oblasts.

Alaska is now divided into states. The Russians use the word государство rather than the word штат (which is used in other nations). The states are divided into oblasts, which act like counties. Because these states act as sovereign nations, singular words are commonly used for the states (rather than full words as would be the case for using oblasts).

The use of the term state is in reference to the fact that Alaska was formed by the unification of [than] independent nations. Unlike Russian oblasts (and other federal subjects), the states have similar patriotism for their state (just like in the US). The State of Vancouver would be the only exception in both cases. In both English and Russian, it would be called the "State of Vancouver" (Ванкуверский штат), and is divided into counties. This is similar to how several states of the US refer to themselves as "Commonwealths," and how Louisiana is divided into parishes (rather than counties). The reasoning for this comes from the same reason for Louisiana (English nostalgia and heritage). I will be working on updates later. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 01:59, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

States to Governorates

Again, change the status of the Alaskan subdivisions. First from oblasts to states, not states to governorates. The main reason for this, I began to think about what an oblast really was. Here's my logic... England is divided into counties. When the English set up colonies in Americas, they were organized into counties, which were organized into provinces. In the case of Russia, the Empire was divided into oblasts (and governorates). When Russia sets up colonies in America, they would be organized into oblasts, which would be organized together into governorates? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 17:12, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

On the state/province level, it'd be "Governate." The was the Russian Empire version of it, anyways. Oblasts were actually under the Governates, kinda like the counties. So yeah, more or less what you describe. Lordganon 00:34, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

Here's Nuckie!!!

I have been getting back into the timeline again. I still believe A LOT needs to be done for the timeline. Articles to be cleaned, information to be updated, and stuff. Here are a couple of announcements and stuff to be coming up in the near future.

• Alaska to Alyeska: I don't know why I want to do this, maybe for a sense of change between ttl and otl. But I am going to be doing this due to history and to differentiate the mostly Russian-speaking nation to the now English-speaking state of the USA. You can read more about my justification here, but I think the name is an interesting change. Obviously, this is only a change for the English language, with the Russian name remaining the same as it has always been. I hope you enjoy the change to the Alyeskian Democratic Federative Republic as much as I feel.

• New Governorate of Queen Charlotte: After doing some more reading on the Queen Charlotte Islands, I am more confident that the British would have colonized the islands more extensively than otl, and the answer is simple: the Russians are Coming! The population would be much, much larger (preferably over a million permanent residents). Though the islands would have a growing Russian population, I predict it would remain dominantly English, adding to the Anglophonic community of the ADFR. Still a lot to do, but I have already updated the flag to now have 18 stars. This also makes me happy, not the number of governorates can be counted by nines (3x3=10 XD). --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 03:11, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

• Other stuff: Other things I have in mind, but not too much detail at the present are... the US WILL get Texas, just not all of it; Chile and Argentina may merge to be one nation; and a lot more to come. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 03:11, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

No Japanese Expedition?

Hello there nuke. Since not many people been on the talk page, I thought I accompany you.

I was thinking about the Matthew Perry expedition that caused the westernization of Japan. However, since the OTL Western USA Coast now is part of both Mexico and Russia, I doubt that expedition will occur in the timeline. What do you think?

RandomWriterGuy 20:30, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

I guess not. I never heard of him. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 21:51, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

That's surprising. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_C._Perry

Pretty famous, imo.

Lordganon 22:04, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

I am very suprised about this Nuke. Let me give you a small summary about who he is.

Matthew Perry was sent to Japan by the USA government in 1852 to ask the Japanese to open up trade to the west. Concerned about the events in China, Japan reluctantly agreed.This led to a domino effect that caused Japan to be one of the strongest countries in Asia.

Without this expedition, what do you think mught happen to Japan?

RandomWriterGuy 03:55, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised that everybody is making a big deal about this. Я люблю Россию, нет Японию!! Но, я люблю хентай (ХР)

I had an idea for another timeline, but it could maybe be possible for this timeline... maybe. I AM NOT PROPOSING THIS YET, SO DON'T TAKE THIS LIKE IT IS GOING TO BECOME CANON OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE.

Russia would be the ones who open up Japan to the west. This Russo-Japanese cooperation could eventually lead to no Russo-Japanese war, Russia could peacefully expand into Manchuria, and Japan would keep Korea (not to mention other potential land grabs in China... maybe). The war with Germany and Austria would still lead to the Russian Revolution and the formation of the Soviet Union (maybe now with a Manchu SSR). Because of the closer relations with Russia/USSR, nationalist Japan may either remain neutral during WWII, or may even side with the Allies. The Empire of Japan still exists (whether that would be better than OTL Japan), which includes Korea, Taiwan, and the Kuril Islands (НЕТ САХАЛИН!!!). Maybe this could lead to the continuation of the USSR (rather than it collapsing completely).

This is just an idea I had for another timeline. I have already made canon that Japan invades the Catherine Archipelago and goes to war with Alaska, and that the US would still gain Hawaii (it just doesn't become a state). But for a long time, I have considered how a vast Russian colonial presence in the Pacific would affect the ambitions of Japan. In Russian America Expansion (this timelines evil twin [I say that with no disrespect]), Alaska actually sides with Japan, and both stay out of WWII, and become the rulers of the Pacific.

In other words, I am open to any suggestions, as long as they don't completely diverge from what is already canon. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 04:34, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

Not a big deal, was just a surprise, lol.

Siding with the Allies might be possible. If they get their resources from the USSR, that might be an option. But it meaning the USSR avoids collapse would be unlikely. Then again, however, Imperial Japan would, if close to the Russian Empire, possibly have a very.... ugly reaction to the formation of the USSR. Debatable, really, as to their actions. But, overall, I think we can safely say they would not join the Axis here.

Lordganon 05:22, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

I guess the "not collapsing" idea was a long shot. I remember watching an alternate history about Japan siding with the Allies (over on YouTube), and it looked interesting. Another idea I thought of... what about China? Could it at all be possible that China sides with the Axis (being a reverse for ttl). If the USSR were to collapse, than it may be interesting so see (at least my idea of) an independent Manchuria which speaks both Manchu and Russian. Also, maybe I could combine the ideas from another timeline I had, having a pro-Russian state in Asia. Ooh! Now I am getting a little exited about the aspect (don't take that as canonization yet). --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 05:31, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

About the only way to possibly avoid a collapse is China-esque reforms, but.... with all of the nationalities, it's unlikely to work.

China could side with the Axis. If Japan doesn't start invading, there'd be a large opening with the Nationalists for a German alliance. Heck, they would have done that otl if it wasn't for the Japan bit. A Soviet Manchuria - which, as you say, would be Manchu-Russian after the collapse - would only make that worse.

Lordganon 05:52, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean by "make that worse."? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 22:26, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

Reasons for China to join the Axis, and the likelihood of it happening. Lordganon 23:31, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

OH!!! I thought you were saying that it would not work or something. But just to clarify (because I am apparently stupid XD)

• A Soviet-controlled Manchuria would encourage the Chinese to join the Axis (and leaving Japan open to being an ally).

That's correct, right? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 23:47, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

It would definitely encourage it, so long as Japan does not invade in the 1930s. A Japanese invasion of China before the war, as in otl, would put the situation to that of otl. Lordganon 23:57, November 21, 2011 (UTC)

Now I am getting interested in this idea. You mentioned that Japan would most likely take the collapse of the Russian Empire negatively. How so? Would it be (more or less) like OTL, in which Japan occupies Vladivostok and such? This could also allow the continuation for Japan to invade the Catherine Archipelago (since it would have been under communist control, but it would have to be much, much earlier). This also leave open the possibility of incorporating another timeline idea I have had. Pretty much, incorporating my former "Dalnevostok" timeline, in which the Far Eastern Republic remains independent, and parlays it to becoming a full SSR of the USSR. While the idea of the FER (as it was in OTL) made it seem impossible to become an SSR, it could if it were to include Manchuria. So my idea for this could be:

• China invades Manchuria, which the USSR would reoccupy in the mid 1940s (like OTL). With no communist China (most likely), the USSR would annex Manchuria. It would be combined with Outer Manchuria (the Far Easter Republic [more or less]), creating a greater Manchu SSR.

I even have some interest in my former "Roosevelt's Germany" into this timeline (maybe). While I know very little about China being an axis, I would assume that even if the US were to get involved, Japan would pretty much annihilate China (as proven in OTL). So more anger would be focused on Germany (rather than divided between the two [I am still surprised Italy is still considered an innocent bystander XD]) . With that, the idea of divided Germany into six, separate states (rather than simply dividing Germany into "temporary" occupation zones). This could be possible, and I love the idea of incorporating old timeline ideas into here, but here is another major question that should be answered before this... if Japan is an ally... will the US get involved in the war? (let alone Alaska). I have already made mention that Hawaii, the Philippines, and Guam would still become US territories, so an American presence in the Pacific will still be active (more or less in comparison with the British). I would assume Pearl Harbor would not happen (at least not a Japanese-lead one). So what (if anything) would encourage the US to go into war against the Axis? I have no dough the USSR would be able to defeat Nazi Germany on their own (granted it would take much longer), but this would lead to a timeline much similar to the Atlantic Iron Curtain. I dough the Germany would invade Great Britain (especially is the USSR is even more of a juicy target than OTL). Quite confusing. Any thoughts? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 00:18, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

(UPDATE: I came across this image a while ago. Seems fitting for this discussion). --NuclearVacuum(Talk) 00:27, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

I think Japan would still invade China that is not held by Russia because they had always wanted to do that.

About the Russian expedition to Japan thing, I might contradict this since before the otl American expedition, there has been no records in history Russians have ever contacted with Japan. I think the country might invade it instead.

--RandomWriterGuy 00:29, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

Whoa, Nuke! Slow down, lol.

Japan could be seen as taking it more negatively, if there is much better terms between the two. Lord knows, they weren't happy about it otl. My line of reasoning, besides good relations, is that if they are on good terms, and the Soviets execute the Royals, the Japanese will take it even worse than otl. The idea of executing royals is not something that will fly well. They'll get over it, mind. Any territory seizing would be like otl, though would take a couple more years to be returned. Afterwards, they can probably continue to get resources from the Soviets - they have the good relations beforehand going there way, after all.

Nor is China in the post-war period capable of invading much of anything - too weak. It'd be a sort of movement ala~ regaining Danzig was in Germany in the 1930s.

China would be getting help from the Germans on a vast scale. And with no communists, they are a match for Japan - remember, the Nationalists did hold their best troops back in that war to face Mao's troops. Japan and the USSR would win in the end, but.... it would take some time.

More anger would indeed be on the Germans. The idea of a six-state Germany is appealing too, lol.

Correct, no Pearl Harbor by Japan - though some sort of similar action by China may not be out of the question. The US, however, would still more than likely get involved. Either one of the Axis does something stupid, or FDR gets a declaration. But Pacific involvement would be more limited. Call in 1943 they get involved, at the latest. Mostly in Europe, though.

Yeah, that image is more or less what I meant, lol.

A German invasion of GB is pretty much impossible.

Japan's ambitions were for both resources, and mostly Korea besides that. Thing is, the quest for resources otl and the militarism in place meant that they continued. Not the case here. Nor have they "always wanted to do that."

Russian contact with Japan was only a matter of time.

Lordganon 01:53, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

Wow! I almost fried LG's brains out XD

I never really considered much about China, so forgive me for implying that they were weak. I am also pretty confident that the Russian Empire would leave Korea alone if Japan agreed to leave Manchuria alone, and allow the Russians a presence in the Pacific. I also have another idea for Japan, granted it would be going against what I have already said up their (in Russian mind you XD). As you said, if Japan were to occupy part of Russia and Manchuria (to give it back later), than maybe it could be parlaid into Japan gaining all of Sakhalin under good terms. Again, a reversal idea. In OTL, Russia agreed to give Japan all the Kuril Islands in exchange for all of Sakhalin. After the Russo-Japanese War, Japan gained southern Sakhalin. When WWII ends, Russia annexes Sakhalin back, and all the Kuril Islands. In this case, the Japan would occupy Primorie and Sakhalin. When Japan gives it back, the USSR could agree to hand over the entire island as some compensation, especially if they both fight Nazi-supporting China. I could also see Japan being more independent from the west. Democratic and capitalist, yes... but would probably be less intimidating than NATO (maybe a good buffer state between them and the American-controlled Pacific. Just an idea. Granted, Japan's sphere of influence could still cause some concerns within the USSR, but you never know.

Not that it has any purpose for this discussion, but I just realized that this would make Japan a permanent member in the UN, and would allow them to continue their nuclear program (IN NORTH KOREA... I STILL CAN'T BELIEVE THAT IS WHERE JAPAN CENTERED THEIR NUCLEAR PROGRAM XD). This would also give China the excuse to readopt their "five races" flag (I love that design).

I just got a devilish idea. Since it seems the timeline is going to be chaining (maybe), maybe I could bring back another idea I originally had canon here, but got rid of. Maybe under the same idea, Fort Elizabeth (in Hawaii) could be successful here (since the POD is still after the failure of 1817). Granted, if it were to become successful, I don't think it should be added as a new governorate of Alaska, but rather a Russian colony which would gradually gain independence. It could be possible, but not too sure. Also, though I dough it, do you think there is any possible chance Russia could gain more in the Pacific (maybe the Philippines or something).

I am shocked you like the Six-Germanys (Germanies?) idea. It could also lead to less tension in Europe between East and West (to a degree). I don't want to write more... in fears I will fry your brain further XD (Sorry about that again) --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 02:24, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry about my head, lol. Too much post to easily reply to is all, lol.

Well, if they are on better terms like that, there's no Russo-Japanese War. Overall, I figure in exchange for selling the Japanese resources, Japan would pull out of any controlled areas easy enough. Agreed on Korea and Manchuria. Japan would have the Kurils, and the Russians all of Sakhalin.

Yep, nukes and a Permanent member :D

Hawaii is a bit of a stretch, truthfully. Anywhere else in the Pacific would be much too far as well. Beyond the ability of Russia to do it, if that makes any sense.

I've actually ran them splitting Germany up, after either of the world wars, on some level thought my head on several occasions, and its an idea I like. Of course, I prefer dissolving it into the kingdoms, etc. after WWI, but I'm a monarchist, so that's not shocking, lol. It's a concept I like, and feel would have been a better solution than what was actually done otl.

Lordganon 08:48, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

I just want to be getting this cleared, so here is a bullet list.

• With no Pacific-bound USA, the US would not lead the area of Japanese westernization. Only three other powers could have done this: Great Britain, Russia, and Spain. Out of the three, I personally believe Russia would make a better candidate, as they are similar in this aspect (eastern nations moving westward). With this, the Russians and the Japanese would have a great alliance during the 19th century, and are still friendly today. With no Russo-Japanese war, Russia would be able to retain all of Manchuria, while Japan would be safe to capture Korea without fear.

• When the Russian Empire collapses into civil war and finally into a communist state, Japan would take it negatively, which would only get worse when it is confirmed that the communists kill the royal family. United with the White movement (initially). Japan would occupy Vladivostok and that region, as well as the Catherine Archipelago. Japan would eventually give the area back.

• With no conflict between the two, the USSR and Japan would begin with great relations during the Cold War.

As for what causes the US to get into WWII, I have no defined idea. As for Hawaii, I have been doing some reading, and I think I have an even better idea that simply a Russian Hawaii.

When the Russians arrive to Kauai (for various reasons), King Kaumualii would eventually butter up to them. Kaumualii wanted to keep his monarchy in Kauai, but the other Hawaiian islands (ruled by Kamehameha I) were threatening to invade in order to unite all the islands. Kaumualii believed having a Russian ally could secure his reign, and keep Hawaii out. RAC sponsor Schäffer would work with, and would eventually be allowed to build a fort on the island. Schäffer was quited to have told Kaualii that the Tsar would back him, when in reality, Tsar Alexander was angered about this move. The project failed, and the rest is history. But with a successful Ross Colony, and more colonists to Russian America, Tsar Alexander may look differently at the idea, and eventually agree to support the idea. Russia would gain an anchorage in the middle of the Pacific, Kauai would remain separate from Hawaii, and Russia gains a new colony (more or less). While I greatly believe the Russian culture and language would soon outnumber the natives (as in OTL with English), Russia may be more willing to cooperate with them. Much like the UK in OTL, Russia would allow the monarchy to rule the islands. I could even see Kauai becoming a protectorate of the Empire (much like what Uzbekistan was back than). With the islands separated from both Eurasia and America, they would not be affected (greatly) by the revolution, and would remain a kingdom to this day. I even found out the island had a Russified name during the early 19th century: Atuvai (Атувай). It comes from the fact that the Kauaian name for the island is Tauai (sine the island used "T" more than the other islands which used "K"). Seems like an interesting name. It wouldn't be alone, Fijians call their islands Viti. It is still a work in progress, but I love the idea ^_^ --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:02, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

<wishes for paragraphs>

Great relations after WWII would probably be an exaggeration. Definitely, they would be better than in otl, but the communist thing would keep things a certain distance away.

US entry into the war would be one of three things: Something like Pearl Harbor, Something like unrestricted submarine warfare, or convincing enough people and getting a declaration. The latter two options being the most plausible, of course. Probably, it ends up being a combination of the two. Really, otl, following the start of American ships escorting some convoys (before Pearl), all it would take would be one, small, accident to get their entry.

With Hawaii, it's a question of force projection - just too far away from Company and Imperial bases. Kamehameha I - British-backed - would more than likely, despite any Russian aid, be able to still control the island. King Kaumualii was actually at the time subservient in all manners to Kamehameha - he had sworn allegiance in 1810 to him. Heck, the R-A Company was on good terms with Kamehameha. They were not inclined to piss him off. Schaffer also gave that king a literal fortune in company property, without permission.

But, the idea floundered otl, not for any of that. The foreign minister had a report drafted for the company by the ambassador in London, which was what decided things. To quote: "The directors of the Company now leaned to supporting Schäffer and requested tsar's approval to proceed. The approval depended on the opinion of foreign minister Karl Nesselrode who in turn relied on the opinion of Count von Liven, the ambassador in London."

The content amounted to "...according to the ambassador, the disadvantages and risks of a Russian protectorate over Kauai outweighed any possible gains." Basically, it would piss off the Brits, among others.

On some level, I've no doubt it would be feasible. But.... overall, not financially viable, or a good idea politically.

Lordganon 18:33, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not too organized in writing on talk pages. As for Kauai... S***!!! Figures, because I was just getting into the idea of a divided Hawaii. I even began an article because I like the idea (I even found a flag that would have been perfect for Atuvai). But in the end, you are right. After doing more reading myself, I have ironically came back to the same reason I abandoned the idea long ago. Schaffer had no connection to reality, and I would greatly support that Hawaii wasn't worth a war with either the UK or the US. In the long run, I need to go back to the true purpose of this timeline, a Russian nation in the Pacific Northwest.

Now then, back to Asia. I have made this map to show how I could see the continent in ttl. Japan would keep Korea, Taiwan, and the Kurils. Excluding Tibet and Uyghuristan, China would now be a federation (with large backing from Japan). With a Japan-backed China, Stalin may be more inclined to annex Mongolia in ttl (it's a surprise it didn't happen in otl) and Uyghuristan. Since the Buryats and Mongols are ethnically similar, Buryatia (which was originally called the Buryat-Mongol ASSR) is transferred to the Mongol SSR. When the USSR collapses, they become independent nations. Mongolia and Manchuria may continue to hold strong relations with Russia (such as Kazakhstan and Belarus in otl). With the recent push to create a Eurasian Union, I could see Manchuria being a strong supporter, and maybe could have been a member of the Union State with Russia and Belarus when it formed in 1994.

Germany is obviously not in this map. But as for it being divided, just look at Roosevelt Plan for more information. Before I forget, I dough any of the German states would be transformed into a monarchy (but I am a republicanist... if that's a word). XD --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 21:44, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for breaking into the conversation and sorry if I'm wrong (this is not my area of expertise and my bias as a parliamentary monarchist is probably blinding me... :P) but I believe Bavaria and perhaps (somewhat unlikelily) either Prussia or Saxony, as the historically most conservative regions of Germany, might retain a limited monarchy. Not sure though. Fed (talk) 23:52, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

I was thinking that the Spanish-American War would go as it did in OTL, however, the Philippines would not be targeted by the US. Is it possible that Russia might invade and conquer the islands?

RandomWriterGuy 02:36, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. As LG already made mention, it is pointless to think. The only reason I thought about it was only if Hawaii would become Russian, but this idea is also a bust. No need to go further on the idea. Besides, I am still confident that both would eventually end up American. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 04:17, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

Just put in blank lines every few sentences, or between thoughts, if you remember =) No worries, though.

Sorry it took so long to reply, been busy.

Yeah, Russian annexation of Mongolia and Urg~ would be likely. I can definitely see them adding that one area to it, as well. Manchuria, though, would really not be expanded like that into otl Russia. By the time any such annexation of Manchuria would occur, that region would be heavily populated by Russians already. With Mongolia, without Japanese armies next door, it would be annexed, no question. A Japanese-backed China - without the three areas, probably not a federation, honestly, but it could be, I suppose - after WWII would be quite likely. Tibet would probably end up a British protectorate, just before WWII, if Russia annexes Manchuria, as well.

Manchuria would likely be part of it with Russia and Belarus.

A few of the German states probably would end up with monarchies. Bavaria, for instance, would be - there was actually a popular movement there to do it after WWII otl. Here, American pressure is lessened on one hand, and on the other federal pressure goes away against it, too. With the British Mandate not joining the rest, a monarchy there - the Brits are, after all, inclined that way - makes sense on some level, too - and, of course, it would be some sort of Hanoverian/British royal invited by the people to do so, as well. (and the word is "Republican, fyi)

Nor would I be counting Austria in all of this, either.

Germany's boundaries, unlike Roosevelt's proposal, would be like otl, I'm sure. As for the states.....

Russian Mandate --> Prussia, maybe Saxony too

British Mandate --> Hanover, maybe Oldenburg too

French Mandate ---> Rhineland and Baden(-Wurrtemburg, add a bit of the US one if this is added to name)

American Mandate ---> Hesse and Bavaria

Prussia, Hanover, Bavaria, Rhineland, and Baden would be the most likely. I recall seeing a few timelines in the past based on this, which only had four states. However, the French mandate is not only two separate pieces, but the French would prefer as many little bits as possible.

For the Philippines, however...

The American ability to beat the Spanish fleet there would be unchanged. But, without a west coast, the troops they used to conquer it would really be infeasible, at best. A US-allied Filipino Republic would be the most likely outcome. Though, I can't help but think that Japan may well have gotten involved, somehow....

Lordganon 08:45, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Communist Prussia FTW!!!

I would prefer to keep the divisions of Germany the way I initially planned them to be in my former timeline. This would mean that Germany is divided into six sovereign nations (Austria, Bavaria, Hanover, Hesse, Prussia, and Saxony) and two international zones. The international zones (I believe) should be later merged into one of the sovereign states (my support would be Hesse, since it is small). The Iron Curtain would most likely follow the same line as OTL, so Prussia and Saxony would become communist (maybe Austria too... maybe). But... I am open to new ideas. Also, I would appreciate it if you didn't call me a Republican, because I am certainly not one (American political joke, you laugh now XD). Did Bavaria really want to go monarchy? I didn't know that. While I would rather they be republics, I don't think there would be much difference between a German republic and a German monarchy (since the Chancellor is pretty much the main political leader in Germany today). I also prefer to include Austria in the bunch for two main reasons. The first being that Austria (for all intensive purposes) is a German state (not to mention they willingly joined Germany [in comparison to Czechoslovakia and Poland]). The second being that Austria WAS treated the same way in OTL as did Germany. Austria and Vienna were similarly divided between the four allies. Had it not been for Austria agreeing to remain neutral from NATO and the Warsaw Pact, we could have very well seen the creation of an East and West Austria in OTL.

Glad you like the idea of a Greater USSR (Великосоветский Союз?). I also have a new idea for the USSR. With Germany more peaceful (in comparison with OTL), and a powerful Japan, I believe the USSR should continue to exist in one form or another. Granted, not a communist state, but definitely a state. This is also due to the fact that (as I have learned greatly from my New Union timeline), most of the republics of the USSR didn't want to become independent. I have also read that had Mongolia joined the USSR, they would have probably been the most resistant to collapse and would have maybe remained in Russia (or so I have read). While it could easily be that Dalny (the Russian name for Port Arthur) could end up under a similar agreement as with Baikonur and Sevastopol, I think they would also want to remain closer to Russia. So in a nutshell, the USSR would live on here.

My main idea would be that the USSR would be economically stable in TTL. With no major occupation in eastern Germany, economic cooperation with Japan and Alaska, Gorbachev would come to power and only have to implement political reforms and more freedoms to the people. With a stable ruble, the people would feel more comfortable being in the USSR (minus communism), and it remains a nation (minus the Baltic States and maybe Moldavia). I'm sure you (LG) would not like the idea, but I have other ideas. I don't have enough time to write them down now, so I will wait to see what you guys think before I make mention of them. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:24, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Before I forget to mention it, my support for the continuation of the USSR relies on one crucial fact... what will Japan become here? Will Japan become the third Superpower, or will it be (more or less) like OTL China (in which is is growing into one gradually). I know without US occupation, the Japanese economy may take longer to get to where it is today, correct? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 19:36, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Neo-USSR?

I have decided to make a subsection (so continue from down here). Anyway, I don't have a lot of time to write, but after thinking about it, I am now interested in incorporating another idea that I have had in mind for a while now, but I never got around to it. In a nutshell, with large Russian migration to Russian America, Siberia and the Far East would also have a population growth and a greater infrastructure than OTL. It was even said in OTL that the Russian Far East was quickly developing prior to the Russian Revolution. What would this mean? What I have in mind, this would mean a greater population and more republics in the region. Along with Manchuria and Mongolia, I am thinking about adding Chukotka and Yakutia as republics. Yakutia would be OTL Yakutia, while Chukotka would incorporate OTL Kamchatka, Magadan, and the northern half of Khabarovsk (not to mention Chukotka). This would also lead to a greater desire to retain a USSR. I am also considering (potentially) incorporating some ideas of the timeline A Red Century and (to a lesser extent) Russian America Expansion. With no major conflicts in Germany after WWII (i.e., no occupation zones) and a "better" relation with Japan, the USSR may initiate economic and political reforms earlier than OTL. I like the idea that Brezhnev is assassinated, and his successor reforms the USSR earlier, so I may add this (similar to how I incorporated portions of the Maple Uprising in TTL. Whether or not Afghanistan would join the USSR (as in ARC), that would be up to debate and consensus here. But in the long run... да СССР... нет СНГ!!! I have also updated the map of Asia, showing you all what I have in mind now (no real changes other than the USSR) --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 20:26, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

UPDATE: Now that I think about it, Afghanistan could end up a pro-Soviet state in TTL. For one reason, no Vietnam war. Obviously, Vietnam would be in Japan's sphere of influence, so no divided Vietnam, no war, and the US would not see the USSR's war against Afghanistan as something to get revenge on (since their is no revenge). I don't really support Afghanistan becoming a republic, only an allied neighbor. I have also come to the conclusion that with no Korean War and no Communist China, this could also allow the USSR to feel more confident to reform itself. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 20:37, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

I just got off of work, so I would like to give more detail to my idea. In OTL, the USSR had a lot to worry about when it came to their borders. This included the negative nature of the German occupation, the North Korean invasion of the South, and the Sino-Soviet split. In TTL, these would not be an issue. Germany is purposely divided (with the USSR gaining [at least] two mandates), the Korean peninsula is part of Japan, and China doesn't become communist (but remains closer to Japan). This would mean that the borders of the USSR would be peaceful, and less need for concerns by Moscow.

I have also grown some interest in the timeline A Red Century, in which Leonid Brezhnev is assassinated, allowing Prime Minister Alexei Kosygin. While not everything about the timeline I agree with, I too would like to explore this POD. While I can't think of how this POD could inevitably happen as part of the previous ones, I believe that with the large amount of PODs already in place, it may be very interesting to see how this one could play out.

I do have one potential way this could become the event of a previous POD, but I am not completely sure I want to do this. The best way to find out if this can work or not is to let you all know what I have in mind. In short: Finnish SSR. Again, I don't have a specific POD for this one, other than the USSR winning the Winter War (maybe with more soldiers as part of the larger population as I will mention below). I am not 100% towards this idea (not even 10%), so let me see what you all think before I say whether I want to explore this idea further.

For a greater population of Russia, I believe this is a given. Granted, I don't mean that Siberia will become the most populous part of Russia, but I do believe a population growth would take place. The main reason is simple: Alaska. With waves of emigration to Russian America, an infrastructure would have to be made in Eastern Russia as well. The other reason I believe this to be true is because of the Russian-American Telegraph. In TTL, not only do I envision it being completed, but maybe beating the Trans-Atlantic Telegraph as the first telegraph line between North America and Europe. A population growth would be needed in order to service the lines.

This population growth would also lead to the creation of more republics of the USSR. Not including Manchuria, Mongolia, and Uyghuristan; I would believe that Yakutia and Chukchia would be likely candidates (at least in the east). --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 01:19, November 26, 2011 (UTC)

Well, as I said, otl German borders would more than likely be the case, so you're losing all of Prussia over the Oder.

Yes, the same line for the Curtain is most likely.

I really can't see the French letting their zone(s) be merged with the other two. Their interests had be that time long lied in a divided Germany, so it would be, in their minds, the more the better. The rest work well.

Wouldn't dream of calling you a Republican - I'm aware it's not your... political opinions? - but American hang-ups aside, the word for someone who is in favor of Republics is indeed "Republican."

Yeah, Bavaria wanted to put its monarch back on the throne. But, they were forced to sign the German constitution, which ensures a republic on all levels. Here, that'd really not stick at all. Otl, a large majority of its people wanted it after the war, and with a divided Germany, they'd likely get it.

The other states would be far less likely - though, as I said, it's possible the Brits may manage one in Hanover - to have a monarchy. But I figure that titles being recognized in some form - ala~ in Weimar/Nazi Germany - would happen in most of these states, especially in Hanover, unlike in otl, where the constitution, again, bans it.

With Austria, support there for the Nazis is always over-inflated - most guesses I've seen have only about half in favor of joining it. And most Austrians would definitely be insulted if you told them they were a "German State," lol. Include them in if you must, but they're pretty separate for a reason. Irregardless of what the Allies did to it, lol.

(note that I'm going to read the subsection later, so this part is only in response to what is before it)

Mongolia probably wouldn't have hung around, really. If Belarus goes, then Mongolia would too.

As you've seen in New Union, if the coup happens, you have a collapse overall.

Really, to put in something like that may be a bit of a stretch - and besides, you already have a timeline where that happens, lol.

With Japan.....

It occurs to me that a Japanese-backed China would stand a good chance, depending on its political makeup - which, as stated, would without the three biggest minorities not likely be a federation - have the emperor restored. I figure, if Japan did in otl in Manchuria, they'd prefer it in China itself too.

It'd likely be someone where like otl - not a superpower, at least not quite, but definitely more than China.

Japan, without being starved of food/resources in the war, and firebombed, would be like otl. American funds were needed largely to rebuild, overall. Add to little damage Japanese attitudes, and they will do very well for themselves. Heck, Japan's economy would probably be even stronger than otl and grow just as fast.

Lordganon 09:23, November 26, 2011 (UTC)

For the German border, the Roosevelt Plan worked on the idea that Germany would go back to it's pre-1938 border (excluding East Prussia), so Prussia would retain the portions that now are part of Poland. As for the "International Zones" becoming their own nations, I don't see much trouble with that, but I will have to do more reading on it.

As for China, I can see it becoming something (more or less) like OTL Germany, in which it would be divided into occupation zones (since China by than was pretty much that [like Hong Kong and so on]). So it would face the same republican situation as did Germany. I would prefer it be a republic. But after doing some reading, I had no idea that the Emperor of Manchuria was actually the last Emperor of China. That is weird, and I guess I see no real problem with the reestablishment of the Empire of China.

Glad you liked the joke about me being a republican XD I know the differences, just thought that would be funny.

Also, why didn't you write your response down here? I said to do so above. Also, why didn't you comment on my new idea? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:02, November 26, 2011 (UTC)

UPDATE: After doing more reading on the subject, I now see what LG means about the Roosevelt Plan not being completely accurate. Because of which, I have made a new map, showing how I think they should look. The new nations would be...

• Prussia: A communist nation which would make up OTL East Prussia, plus portions of OTL Poland. Did you know that Stalin originally planned to to have the entire Oder River be the border between Germany and Poland? I think this is a pretty interesting idea, and this could also lead to OTL Kaliningrad going to Poland... maybe. I am not completely open to the idea, because it makes Prussia look weird. So, just an idea.
• Hanover: A united country of British occupied Germany. I don't believe it should be divided.
• Bavaria: A kingdom that makes up OTL Bavaria
• Rhineland: OTL Rhineland-Palatinate, North Rhine-Westphalia, and Hesse. It would incorporate parts of the claims of France, UK, and US (creating a larger buffer state and a neutral nation).
• Swabia: The national name for Baden-Württemberg.
• Saar: Potentially annexed into France, or added to the Rhineland.

What do you think? I would also like a response to my Neo-USSR idea. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:02, November 26, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that, as I said, didn't read any of the sub-section. Time constraints, you know? Been a busy week, and I generally don't get much writing done with the wife around, lol.

So.... Comments on the section I didn't get to before.....

With no Real Russo-Japanese War, you are correct: The population and industry in the region, without war damage/shipping supplies or troops instead of industry or settlers, combined with the additions, would make the area much more developed.

I really can't see those two areas being made into SSRs on their own, however. ASSRs would definitely be present in some form, but the areas where those groups mainly are would only end up slightly more populated than otl, especially Yakutia. You are right that Chukotka would likely be bigger, mind, though I suspect that only parts of Kamchatka and Magadan would end up included.

Oh, there'd still be conflict. Not quite like otl, but it would remain. It never really was about the zones, past a certain point, but the overall Cold War troubles.

Brezhnev getting assassinated would likely (i.e.55-60% in favor) mean that Alexei Kosygin does come to power, at least for a bit(note, too, his 1980 death), though odds are almost as good that a hardliner comes to power. Kosygin was really the most moderate member, but at the same time, he wasn't as liberal as that timeline makes him to be. His reforms, with full support from the party, were less than successful - results were poor, and they were not popular, either. There's no proof that they did any good either, and most scholars believe they did no good - they just benefited from luck with their timing, giving an appearance of improvement.

Politically, he wasn't the best diplomat. And if his pet projects were threatened in any way, he became like Stalin to crushing things, lol. Though, he did support the reforms when done in the Bloc.

I just can't see reforms having much impact. Even if he came to power, Kosygin wouldn't have the power or time to do it. Personally, given the failure of his 1965 reform, I doubt he'd actually get in charge, myself.

I can see some more minor reforms than in otl. But, the net result - maybe, a year or two later, but unlikely - would probably be the same still.

Any pro-Soviet government in Afghanistan would have to be backed up by force ala~ otl. Just doesn't end well. And there's no way they would become part of the USSR.

Yes, Vietnam - under its emperor, probably - would be Japanese-aligned.

I've no doubt that some kind of conflict would still occur about the time of the Korean War. There were several events otl, for instance, that were ignored because the west was already involved in Korea. One of them would likely "blow up" here.

For the most part, their borders really wouldn't be secure. The German border still needs to be secure, and Prussia/Saxony still occupied. It remains negative, only a bit better. China still remains on the border, and would continue to hold a grudge. If anything, they would have to have large troop numbers there from 1945 on, rather than decades later. Same goes for the Korean border, and the Japanese maritime borders. Because while Japan would have better relations with the USSR than the US does, they still need to be watched far more than otl - not weakened by war, and the militancy not gone on all levels. Maybe more peaceful than otl, but the east definitely has more potential than otl.

No way the Finns could get annexed. The Winter War's goals were really limited to what was taken - which is why nothing else was taken after WWII. Just not really possible.

Well, the population would be up, true enough, but..... you've got more territory to police and protect, colonies in Alaska to inhabit, and colonists in Manchuria. Overall, it would largely cancel itself out, I believe. (WWI, mind, would have more supplies and troops available, so the Tsar will likely do a touch better with his warfare)

I do expect it would get finished here. But, considering that it was only thought up after the Atlantic cable was first done otl, I really have to doubt it would be done first.

And, I really have to say that the Manchurian SSR wouldn't go over the Amur, and probably wouldn't get over the otl border. That area was really largely uninhabited until Russian colonization, and would be populated by them before the annexation of Manchuria were to occur.

All right, and the recent parts.....

I really don't think China would end up divided into zones like that, myself. Unlike in Europe, I really have to think that the Chinese war would be much more so like the otl Pacific War in its combatants. Replace American involvement with Japanese, of course. Yep, those emperors were one and the same. There's little reason for the Japanese to change their tune all that much, lol. Note, too, that the Chinese Nationalists would be the ones in charge fighting the Allies in this situation.

The otl German-Polish border happened due to Stalin's demands for an ice-free port in the west, and Polish demands for the area in question. It's interesting, but there's really not much reason for it to change, even with an ice-free port in the east.

Agree by and large with the German division you have there. Saar would be added to whatever state it touches.

Perhaps the one point there I doubt, mind, is that the three powers - the Soviets would keep theirs intact in some form, obviously - would slice up their zones to make another country. You've got three different styles of virtually everything going on, and it's these admins that would be the ones advising on it. The French zones would be buffers in one form towards this purpose. Swabia would be a good name, I think, with the boundary on that map, though if you go with just the French zone, I can say it definitely would be Baden.

Also, a note: the otl states of Germany were drawn up in the late 1940s, and mostly had no historical basis whatsoever. So you don't need to use them here ;)

Lordganon 09:28, November 27, 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for commenting. I didn't know you hated subsections (you are more picky than me XD). In the long run... this is beginning to get too confusing and frustrating for me. I think that (in order to keep my brains from exploding), we should all step back for a little bit. You know, do something else and come back with a fresh mind. For closing, Germany will need to be further looked at, I have also come to the conclusion that Manchuria would not include OTL Primorskie and Priamurie, I had no idea the Transatlantic telegraph was first by a decade (from the program I watched years ago, they made it out that it was a neck-in-neck race), and Russia/USSR will have to be looked into further... later. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 01:43, November 28, 2011 (UTC)

Which side Alaska is on?

Which side is Alaska on in the Cold War in this timeline? RandomWriterGuy 23:11, November 28, 2011 (UTC)

Permission

Can I use two of this timeline's flags for my own alt timeline? Truteal (talk) 06:05, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Which flags do you wish to use? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 20:15, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

This one and the flag of Queen Charlotte Truteal (talk) 23:00, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

I see no harm in you using those flags. However, I only insist that you use the links provided, and do not upload duplicates to this site. Here are the links

• File:Old Flag of the Far North (Russian America).svg
• File:Flag of Queen Charlotte (Russian America).svg

--NuclearVacuum (Talk) 23:37, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Will do Truteal (talk) 05:25, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

CaN I

Can I Contribute? 19:46, August 4, 2013 (UTC)

May you please be more specific? Also, this particular page is off limits. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 23:22, August 4, 2013 (UTC)

Probly I will expand the page on socialism Alaska and make a few pages with your permission. Octavian, Hail Marius 01:41, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

I am still in the process of working on the details for the Alaskan Socialist Republic, so I am afraid to say that too is off limits. However, I am interested in what ideas you have in regards to new pages. I would also recommend reading the Editorial Guidelines before going any further. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 21:24, August 5, 2013 (UTC)

I will expand the page on the American Krai add a page on the Russian Revolution in Alaska. There will be a few fights between socialist rebels and the Republic of Alaska. Octavian, Hail Marius 02:09, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

The American Krai is off limits, and there is already a page for the revolutionary wars (which is a WIP and also off limits until it can be organized). --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 02:45, August 6, 2013 (UTC)

So i was just thinking would there be a pro-Monarchist movement in Alaska. Octavian, Hail Marius ^{(Play With Oct!)}

Never considered it, but I would suppose such an organization would exist. Alaska was a safe haven for the White Movement and would've likely housed the monarchist factions of the movement. There may have been proposals to reorganize Russian America as a government in exile ruled by the Tsar (a la "Napoleon's World"). However such an idea would've died with the royal family, and the chaos of the Alaskan Wars would've cause any monarchist movements to gradually peter out of favor.

Such an organization would likely mimic the Constantian Society or any other monarchist group. Alaska may be the home for some members of the House of Romanov, but they would have no power or say within Alaska, aside from being a historical curiosity. I'm intrigued at such a concept. If you would like, you are more than welcomed to expand on this idea. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 01:43, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

Doubt it would have died with the royal family in Russia, but the chaos after the war would have done it. The last really good claimant would have died by the time that all finally got sorted out, and that's after all the impact from the communists was added.

Would be something more akin to the monarchist societies/support you find today in Bulgaria and Romania.

I'd also guess that there would be a much better organized group of Romanovs than the otl one, too - more means, I think. Suspect that there would be no dispute as to the current claimant, either. More or less that one gets recognized by the Russian Orthodox Church in the Americas over the other.

That Church would also have far more standing, for that matter, but that's something for another post.

Lordganon (talk) 13:58, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

Categories

I noticed that most pages for this timeline are not noted with the "Russian America" category. Would you prefer that all pages be grouped instead into a sub category, instead of having them all contain the category? Thanks, Mscoree (talk) 14:47, September 22, 2013 (UTC)

I generally don't overfill the main category with every-single page as subcategories work just fine. As far as I know there is no rule requiring the main category to be used, and most users here tend to use subcategories more. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 17:01, September 22, 2013 (UTC)

Article Proposal - Buddhism

Hello Nuclear Vacume,

I would like to write an article specifically about in Alsakya. When I was reading the general Alaska page, I started thinking about Russia's diveristy. Kalmykia and the diaspora of Kalmyks could lead to emigration to Russian America after the war with Spain. News would spread about open land in the American West and the opportunity for autonomy the Kalmyks wished to have. Buddhism would be the thread that kept Kalmyks together in the early years, assuming Kalmyks are travelling together. Buddhist Kalmyks would be on the frontlines of Russian settlement in North America as they would be deliberating looking to find a land far away from outside intrusion.

This would contrast with the massive influx of Chinese that will occur whenever the Alaskyan (OTL Californian Gold Rush) occurs in this timeline. A trickle may turn into a flood as people such the Buryats fall under Russian control will turn to the east to escape their situation.

I am still thinking about more ideas for this this. In the long term Buddhism in Alaskya will be divided by ethnicity but will gain additional energy with more surges from Eurasia. Buddhism might eventually become a unifier for different peoples from East Asia if theological differences can be resolved and these peoples feel the need for common ground/

The rise of the USSR will certainly lead to more Kalmyks arriving along with Mongols. There is the likely hood that these new immigrants will ethier fight with or join native Americans depending on how much of their nomadic nature is retained. Their society will be held together by Tibetan Lamanic Buddhism, monks and/or priests may be the civilian leaders when they make their new settlements.

Buddhists in Alaskia may very well become a target of Russian imperial authorties prior to independence, if they become so organized and apparant that they are seen as a threat or compeition to the Russian population. Ethnic Russians may follow the Kalmkys into remote settlements.

Eventually Kalmkys might be given a desginated area almost like a reservation or will be forced to disperse.

I think though that after the 1940's there will be something of a renewal for Buddhists in Alaska, assuming that a democratic government relaxes controls and offical discrimnation. Also will be the phenemon of former Christians becoming Buddhists, Russian intellectuals with orientalisim would make their own new school of Buddhist thought distinct from the Tibetan traditions of the minorities. A school possibly called New World Buddhism that is more friendly to Monothesim, and interested and meditation. I am thinking that the "Pure Land" concept in Buddhism would take on a literal meaning where converts beleive that the pure land is Alaska and more specifically the secluded Rocky Mountains.

New World Buddhism will primarly be the young mostly whites in Alaskia but that dosen't mean they will be cut off from original Buddhism. Followers might invite Mongol or Kalmyk holy men to teach them.

By the late 20th century Buddhism will be a small but established and visible minority with different sects related to ethnicty and location. Perhaps 5-15% of the population could be Buddhist.

71.80.49.114 23:36, January 8, 2016 (UTC)

I am Stepintime (talk) 23:41, January 8, 2016 (UTC)

Greetings, Stepintime. I'm very happy to see that you've taken an interest in this timeline and wish to add to it. You are more than welcome to do so, but all I ask is that you read and follow the Editorial Guidelines before doing so.

I hope you don't mind constructed criticism, because I do see a few holes which should be addressed. The first being the desire of the Mongols to resettle themselves to avoid "outside intrusion." From what I've been able to read, there doesn't appear to be any examples from OTL to support this (at least from what I've been able to find). By no means does this discount Mongols from migrating to Russian America and Alaska, rather I believe the autonomy angle should be played down a little.

I'd also tone down rhetoric of Buddhist/Mongol discrimination by the Russians. From what I've been able to pick up, the Russian Empire was tolerant towards Buddhists, with many Tsars being on board. I highly doubt the Empire would work to discourage or otherwise impede Buddhists from settling in Alaska (let alone anywhere in the Empire). The real trouble would come from the Soviet Union, which viewed the religion as a threat towards State Atheism and as a cohort of the Japanese. Not to say discrimination wouldn't exist, but that it would've come from the people of Russia (rather than its imperial government). It could also be likely that Asian Alaskans (more so than Buddhists) would be discriminated in a similar manner to those of OTL Canada and the United States.

I could see Buddhism becoming a unifying force for many Asian Alaskans, though it should be noted that Alaska would be a melting pot and would be more comparable to the United States (in this respect). Asian Alaskans would see themselves as Alaskans first.

Other than that, the rest could work out well. I already foresee Buddhism to be the third largest religion in Alaska (after Christianity and Judaism). I could easily see non-Asian Alaskans turning to Buddhism and going as far to invite foreign monks to teach Alaska (though Alaskan-born monks would be just as likely). I could definitively see Buryat, Kalmyk, and Mongol emigration expanding under Joseph Stalin (especially if their lands are taken away from them in Eurasia).

I don't believe I'm missing anything. I do hope this was helpful. I look forward to see what you have next. -- NuclearVacuum 06:01, January 9, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your thorough response. In reference to the Kalmyks it looks like they did endure enrorchment under the reign of Catherine the Great, source. Eventually this led to the last khan of the organized Kalmyk Khante in leading a move of 90,000 of his people to Dzunguria. Many did not survive the journey, the move destroyed the organzation of the Kalmyks though some still remained in the area. Many dispered throughout Russia and the Kalmyk men joined the army in many of Imperial Russia's wars. 

As far as Mongols in Mongolia I know very little about them prior to the Bolshivek destruction.

I agree that in the Stalin period there would be a huge second or third wave of immigrants (the first wave happening in the 19th century). I agree with you that the ordinary Russian people may discrimnate aganist any non Christian stranger of asiatic looking origin.

Another thing I would like to touch on is that sooner or later no matter what happens in the beggining there will be an urban exprience of Asian Alaskians and I don't want make it quite like the Chinese OTL but I would like to explore their experience in the cities. Perhaps as aritsians and shopkeepers. I wonder how much conflict there might be between the different Buddhist ethnitices, if they would work together of fight for limited resources (space in cities).

To elaborate for the Non Asian converts there will be a few who show interest in the colonial period, and make writings about the asia Buddhists in Alaska and create interest. They might also be the founders of the New World Buddhism movement, this will inspire the conversion of whites much later. In modern day ATL ethnic Russian Buddhists would be active on college campuses.

I have read the editorial guidelines, :). They make sense.

Also, I was just wondering about the major port cities all people in Russia would use to sail to Alaska, it might be Validvistock eventually if the Russians take Northern Manchuria like OTL but early one maybe it would be somewhere out of Salkhalin?

Stepintime (talk) 06:52, January 9, 2016 (UTC)

Hey Nuclear Vacume,

Just wanted to let you know that I am mostly done with the two articles I have made, . I have to go back to real responbilities so I wont have much time to edit this but in the general Buddhism article I might like to add more sub headings about places, and charities just to make it more complete.

Do you object to using made up people in this timeline? I have some mentioned in my article but that can be changed, with your permission I might like to eventually make articles about two or three major Buddhists. This would primairly me to give little biogrophies describing their growing up in this Alaska and to connect them to the mainstream. This would be in the case of the current leader of the Alaskan Lamaists.

Also, what do you think about the masscare that takes place in the socialist republic? I worried that might be too extreme but I do like the idea being there in some shap or form.

I was also thinking that it would make sense to make an article about Asian Alaskans to distinguish them from Buddhists though there would be overlap the Asian page would mostly have its own content, focusing more on the working, and economic conidtions on immigrants. Also would be coverage of Asians dropping out of their traditonal religions or converting to Orthodoxy to be more mainstream. Also what might be included is information about urban enclaves, criminal organzations and secret socities.

I hate to sound like I am piling on but I have one more idea..

What about a production of source material from Alaskans? To clairfy memiors or historical fictionalzations to describe the experinces of certain Alaskans.  Whenever I had free time I might work on this.  Here are some exmples

- A native American (perhaps a Haida woman) converting to Orthdoxy but then witnessing the brutallity on her native people by christians

-A St. Petersberg Merchant seeing opprotunity in Russian Alaska right after the Spanish War, comes to Somana himself to develop the land profitbly, still finds land mosly untouched.

-An American or English Doug settler coming to terms with Russian rulers in the late 19th century, his family got there before it was bought by the Russian Empire.

- An Asian Rusian arriving as a fresh settler and interacting with native Americans.

- An ethinic Russian religous minorty- ie: An Old Beliver or a Protostant going to Alaska for safe haven?

- A lawyer taking part in the political finalzization of Alaska's reunifcation in the 40's

- A teacher describing the events of the Alaskan wars in the 50's

Three Shielkov ideas ...

-A miner in Shielkov that at least initally supports the Alaskan Socialist Republic in the mist of the Russian Revolution OR

A Soviet Gulag prisoner being sent to a workcamp in Socialist Alaska (if there is such workcamps otherwise no)  OR

A NKVD agent being sent to the Alaskan Socialist Republic to monitor the situation among his fellow comrades

- An ethnic Russian housewife's reflection on the election of Kardash and the Bering Strait Crisis. Her opinions change following the crisis, perhaps she might start thinking about asserting her indepence (ie: If Kardash gets elected, its a big soical change, anything is possible) Or she might not depends on the flavor.

- The experinces of a post Soviet immigrant in the late 80's early 90's comparing their mother country to Alaska.

The memiors would be on their own pages, and would be the writings of these characters directly.

Thanks for reading for allowing me to write proposals in the first place

Stepintime (talk) 22:04, January 24, 2016 (UTC)

P.S: I wonder how unversties in Alaska will be, there is a public system isnt there?

P.S.S I feel scattared I keep coming up with questions.

How do you code all of those wikipedia links, also how do you code Russian words into the text just like wikiepedia? It looks really cool.

Do forgive me for the delayed response. I've had a lot on my plate these past few weeks. I did notice your two articles and they both look great. However, may I suggest we merge them into a single article? The reason I say this is because both articles refer to the same subject, just from different angles.

I would personally prefer that all peoples mentioned across this timeline have an equivalent in OTL. In fact, I've taken the extra steps and looked into the ancestries of many people to see who'd likely be Alaskans ATL. So yeah, I can see if this sounds frustrating. You can leave those mentioned on your two articles alone for now (no harm done), but I'd refrain from making any personal articles for now. Though thinking about it, I could see many Asian Americans/Canadians potentially being Alaskans ATL, so you can take a look through there and see what comes up (if you want).

Do forgive me, but I don't quite understand what you mean by "massacre." Are you saying you want there to exist one for this timeline, or you think the situation of OTL should remain the same? Do forgive me.

Those story ideas sound wonderful. Though I'm not too sure how to incorporate them into the timeline (other than its own page). You are more than welcome to expand them in detail if you wish, and we can work out the missing details.

As for Alaskan universities... It never really crossed my mind. I'd assume it be a similar situation to the United States/Russia (at least for the time being).

In regards to coding, the Editorial Guidelines give instructions on how to do this for both Wikipedia articles and Russian America articles (link here).

And no need to worry about the amount of content. Curiosity is a great thing to have. I welcome all ideas. -- NuclearVacuum 03:00, January 25, 2016 (UTC)

No prob Nuclear Vacume thanks for the reply,

Sure the articles will be merged pronto. 

I have taken a look at the Asian Canadians since reading, and the Buddhist Canadians, I should be able to find people and replace the fictonal characters.  Would it be possible though to possibly use OTL people from Eurasia if suitable Canadians and Americans cant be found? 

The Masscare I am talking about is  the one I wrote about in the History of Buddhism article, I think that the Socialist Soviet Alaska acting on orders from the USSR would certianly engage in destruction of religious locations and have massive exceutions resiters and suspected resisters.

I think the memiors should collectively be on a single page, with each memior having their own heading. Just to clarify the characters don't have to be real people right? Because they are not high profile, and they won't have their own personal pages.

I am thinking about Ethic Pages in the long term, like you have for Russian and Ukranian Alaskans but I am not sure if they should all be under an Asian page or if they should have their own pages, in an Asian page each major group would have their own headings.

Mongol Alaskans

Manchurian Alaskans- Manchuria is still a distinct country in this ATL so this group may be distinct as well.

Chinese Alaskans

Possibly Japanese and Korean pages but only if they had at least a half page content each.

Turkish Alaskans?-

Ah Editoral Guidelines, thakns for the reminder. :). Special Thanks for allowing contributions

Stepintime (talk) 04:29, January 25, 2016 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. Feel free to ask me if you require any genealogical help.

In regards to the massacres during the Alaskan Wars, I highly doubt they would take place. Though Communist Alaska would gain support from the USSR, I doubt they'd take direct orders from them. In fact, I've been considering the possibility that the Alaskan Socialist Republic becomes a home for Leon Trotsky and his teachings. Sorry for going off on a tangent.

Though Communist Alaska would be the worst place for Buddhists, I don't think it'd be an actual massacre. Monasteries would be destroyed and Buddhists would either have to assimilate or leave. Violence could erupt (no questions asked), but only in a few areas (such as Nushagak and Unalaska). All-in-all bad, but nothing genocidal in nature.

As for the rest of Alaska, nothing close to the Alaskan Socialist Republic. For these regions, think of the relations between Asians and Europeans being similar to how African Americans (or Asian Americans) were treated in the US. Riots and violence, probably. State-sponsored prejudice and massacres, likely not. Hope that helps.

The memoirs could be "fictional stories" set within the timeline, written and based on ATL experiences. If that helps.

I would hold off on creating any more ethnic pages for now. Because I don't wish to copy and paste Wikipedia articles, I've been considering to merge the already existing pages into a single article. So any additional ancestral groups can easily be added and expanded upon.

Also forgive me, I forgot to answer your question about Russian words. The simple answer is that I've enabled the use of the Russian keyboard on my PC, so I can switch between English and Russian at will (хорошая собака). Your computer likely has this in its settings, but it's not a requirement if you don't need it. There also exists Cyrillic keyboards you can use online. And if all else fails, just copy and paste from Wikipedia. Hope that helps you out. -- NuclearVacuum 05:37, January 25, 2016 (UTC)

Map Mistake?

I'm not sure if I am doing this right, but I wanted to mention something I noticed in your Russian American timeline in regards to the city of Vladikaskady. I am assuming that Portland, Oregon is your inspiration, as you use the Portland flag and mention that it is located on the OTL Columbia River. However, your map of the various governorates shows Vladikaskady located along the southern Willamette River.

Anyways, I'm loving your timeline. Having lived here all my life and having many first generation Russian friends growing up, this has been a wonderful read and a fun mental game to run around in my head. And I'm only being picky because I live here, lol. Sorry.

97.120.9.200 21:59, February 1, 2016 (UTC)JustMe

Thank you so much for mentioning this. I honestly though I already updated that map, guess I completely forgot. ^^; I recently recycled the name Vladikaskady from one area to another, hence the reason it was mislabeled. I went ahead and corrected the map. -- NuclearVacuum 00:00, February 2, 2016 (UTC)

World War II Article

Map of China today (ATL).

This topic is for KingSparta300 and their interest in working on an article for World War II.

The overall scenario that I've been toying around with stems from Japan loosing the Russo-Japanese War in the early 1900s. Despite being able to regain lost ground following the Russian Revolution, the blow was enough to make Japan more pragmatic in their imperial expansion and overall relations with the West. This would include focusing more on Korea and the like.

In China, the situation would also be different. The Russians/Soviets would continue to hold onto Manchuria and Mongolia, thereby absorbing much of the Communist forces in the region. Germany also continues to support China economically and militarily, allowing the KMT to hold onto power and effectively push the Communists out. China would become part of the Axis Powers during the onset of the war, not Japan.

Much like Germany and Italy, China also looked to expand their influence and re-establish China as a global power. China invades and occupies French Indochina, Hong Kong, Macau, and possibly could go as far as Singapore. China would attack Manchuria during Operation Barbarossa and subsequently Korea, resulting in Japan declaring war and siding with the Allied Powers.

Japan would attack China in a manner similar to OTL's Second Sino-Japanese War. Despite being aided by the Allies (especially in raw materials), Japan is virtually fighting China alone until Germany surrenders. The war in China ends when nuclear bombs are used against Chinese cities. This forces China to surrender quickly, but is also meant to be a message against the Soviet Union and Japan (a la OTL).

I've written more in my sandbox (here and here). I hope this helps you out. I look forward to seeing what you can add to this. -- NuclearVacuum 21:59, February 6, 2016 (UTC)

Who leads the KMT? Cause if it same as OTL, then the KMT should be a push over to Japan. KingSparta300 (talk) 22:36, February 6, 2016 (UTC)

I haven't put much thought into this. So for now it should be considered the same leadership as OTL. But if you have any suggestions, I'm all ears. -- NuclearVacuum 03:57, February 8, 2016 (UTC)

Featured!

Just wanted to celebrate this project being elevated to featured status! Go Nuke!

Stepintime (talk) 05:31, April 10, 2016 (UTC)

... That was sure a surprise. I didn't realize it was finalized. Thank you for the congrats, Step. ^_^ -- NuclearVacuum 19:47, April 10, 2016 (UTC)

New proposals

Hey Nuke,

I think there should be articles on the following subjects

-1 The role of Dachas in Alaska- As southern ATL Alaska would be the warmest parts of the Russian Empire, there would be a culture of nobillity and early industralists setting up estates, which would be used by some famlies that otherwise spent most of their time around St.Petersburg and Moscow

-2 Alaskan Enviromental Issues- Given that OTL Russian America came close to driving species like seal and otter close to extinction in the area we could imagine the ecology would be much worse today. Espically with so many more people in Alaska, more industriazation of the Pacfic North West might make climate change a worse issue in ATL than in OTL. The Red Woods might be driven to extinction,  whether the conlonial krai would make any early measures of enviromental protection is up in the air.

-3 Russian Port cities to Alaska- Odessa and Vlaidvistock should have their own articles, being critical to the history of Alaska. Vladivistock would turn to a mentroplist overnight with the transiberian railway connecting Moscow to Alaska in a way like never before.

-4 Alaskan Natives should have their own article- key subjects would be 1- how antrhopology was effected by 19th century Russians classifing natives as just being more Siberians and undistinct from native people in Siberia (my idea). How different native groups residing would be classified- just think all of the differences between the Pomo and the Inuit. And of course the experience of natives under the colonial Society. The long Tinglit War would be important as well as the later assimilation, in some areas like Sonora they might have reservations but in others they might just be the general populationl. Remember most of the labor force in the early colonies were native- but this might change of course

. I would take in to account that the larger native population in OTL would be out of the Orthodox Church providing medicine and other help for such peoples. Finally this article without obviously saying so would have to show "how natives would be different under Russian rule than British/American Rule). Realistically perhaps the different natives might have their own articles or this could be in one big article,

Major tribes to be covered by a native article

- Eskimo

- Tinglit and Haida

- Inuit

- Athabaskan

-Pomo

Possibly More

5. Construction of a bering strait brige or tunnel-

In the post Cold War- would both sides being more closer than the real Russia and U.S this project might actually become a reality and transform Asia and North America's economy as a result.

6. Soviet Shangains (I mean spies) in Alaska- I mean come on- can't we have a little fun here? Think of all of the possiblites, in the chaos of the wars Soviets would be interested in Alaskans for many reasons - having a common culture and all of that,  As much as Soviet shangians as there was in Great Depression America this would be multiped many times. During the Cold War we could see situations like that of North and South Korea perhaps complete with crazy kidnappings, ransoms, defections and what have you.

7 And last but not least Bald- Hairy- I admit this just rude russophilia here, but is it possible that sometimes history just rhymes. Could we have this sequences of bald and hairy leaders part of Alaska's culture just like Russia- and if its ever really broken it would be a major tabloid story

Now I can't make all of these at once but I would like to see these on a shortlist and if possible have permission granted to get started. I admit this alot to just throw at you, I am just enthuastic I guess. Thanks for considering!

Stepintime (talk) 05:26, June 28, 2016 (UTC)

Your idea for dachas sounds interesting. As an addition, I've also been playing around with an idea that dachas (at least in appearance) would form the basis for contemporary Alaskan homes (with some American and Mexican influences).

Interesting angle in regards to the environment. Though it might be more prevalent to add this as a section on Alaska's article (as opposed to being its own).

Without a doubt, Odessa and Vladivostok would be more prominent cities. Though it should be noted that Vladivostok would be overshadowed by the Manchurian city of Dalny (OTL Dalian), but Vladivostok would still be more prominent (none the less). You can begin proposed articles if you wish.

I guess you can start an article for Native Alaskans. The only problem is that I'm debating what they would be collectively called by ATL Alaska. Ironically, the Russian language continues to use the word индецы (indetsy; lit. "Indians") to refer to the native peoples of the Americas. I'm debating whether Alaska would continue to use this name or adopt a more neutral one (e.g., Aborigines, Indigenes, Natives). Though I currently as we keep them in a single article for now.

We've previously discussed the possibility of a Bering Strait tunnel (years ago). However, it was deemed to be too ambitious (if not ASB) to have happen by today. If anything, calls for a connection are more vocal and rumors continue to say it will "happen next year," but nothing would've been done by now.

Hm... I rather love the idea of "spy shenanigans" taking place. In all honestly, this would happen to Léon Theremin (both OTL and ATL). While I could see this being "crazy" for the early decades of the Cold War, such instances would NEED to be cut down (if not stopped) once good relations begin to develop by the 1960s (otherwise Alaskans would walk).

LOL! I'm well aware of this trope. I would rather focus on the individual themselves, as opposed to their scalp. So all-in-all, I can't say I will follow this trend intentionally. -- NuclearVacuum 01:59, June 29, 2016 (UTC)

- Dachas would of course be the gold standard of colonial culture, espically in "safe places". For your idea of Dachas being mass produced I think we could see this come ironiaclly from Vasily Kardash as president. While mass dacha style would start from the 40's I could really see it take off during the 60's. Meanwhile new words would be used to describe Dachas of true sophication, and there would certainly be slurs aganist the mass produced dachas.

-I like the idea of them still techincally being called indians by this culture at least until very recently, though by this point advocates would be trying to change the words in ATL.

Fair enough on the project, it would be astromoatically expensive

We could imagine the Bering Sea crisis merely putting a cork on an exploding bottle when it comes to espinoge

That's cool, about the "sclaps" haha

Maybe a city article for Daliy then too, Stepintime (talk) 03:27, June 30, 2016 (UTC)

LOL! I think you misread my dacha idea (allow me to correct). I believe Alaskans would adopt a lifestyle comparable to their North American neighbors, in that most average Alaskans would live in suburbs. This would go against the norms in Russia, in which most average Russians live in "khrushchyovkas" (apartment blocks). Alaskans do this both to "stick it" to the USSR, but also due to greater influence from Mexico and the USA.

Keeping this in mind, my remarks were that dachas (both in appearance and lifestyle) would play a key role in what what will become contemporary Alaskan suburbia. The most noted characteristic would be for Alaskan suburbanites to reserve a portion of their property to grow produce, with it being almost a taboo for Alaskans not to do this (similar to how a well-managed lawn is "required" in the US). Besides that, Alaskan homes would vary completely (with a "dacha-style" being one such style among dozens).

That being said, I'm somewhat mixed as to whether or not "holiday dachas" (as they exist in Russia) would exist in Alaska (at least in large numbers). Since most Alaskans would be suburban, there would exist no major demand need to such holiday homes. This is not to say holiday homes would not exist within Alaska (in fact, I could see an industry being developed around this), rather I believe those in the market for holiday homes would be minor (compared to Russia). My guess is that such dachas would exist for urbanites and snowbirds.

Yeah, Russian language names can be odd for an American to learn. It becomes more awkward when you learn the colloquial word they use for "Africans" (seriously, look it up).

Ironically, the expanse wouldn't be the real issue. Rather it's how much (or how little) money the project would return following its completion (something of a bridge to nowhere).

Glad you like the "scalp" remark. XP -- NuclearVacuum 20:29, June 30, 2016 (UTC)

Interesting talk on the dachas, sounds about right. I basically saw what you are saying but I thought the populist idea of them being mass produced could appeal as well.

I looked up афророссияне though I found another word on a Los Angeles time article complaining Russians refered to them as worse things.

Pretty interesting. Stepintime (talk) 03:38, July 6, 2016 (UTC)

Another New Proposal

Hey Nuke. I was just wondering if Alaska could have kept the old Russian units of measurement (and possibly the pre-1917 letters), possibly due to American influence and/or a desire to "stick it" to the Soviets. Just asking

GR1995 (talk) 13:23, August 24, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. Though it should be known that it's already canon that Alaska retained the old measurements. As for the letters, I believe Alaska would've adopt the new standards as the Russian language became more global. Regardless of how anti-Soviet Alaskans would be, it would become more and more difficult to retain the old spellings because of the language's global importance and the influx of immigrants (unless Alaska were inclined to proclaim themselves a separate language). -- NuclearVacuum 22:33, August 24, 2016 (UTC)

Also, as a helpful guide into Russian phonology, here's a good page for it. [1]

Also, can you point me to the part where it is mentioned that Alaska uses the pre-1917 units.

GR1995 (talk) 02:11, August 26, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the link.

As for the measurements, they are written within the main page for Alaska (within its area). -- NuclearVacuum 02:30, August 26, 2016 (UTC)

Also, I'd also like to talk to you about some other proposals I have in my head:

1) Regarding Spain/Portugal (since you mentioned in the map that it's one of those places that you want to alter in the future) -

For Spain, I would like to envision one where Franco somehow does not cede the Spanish protectorate (and Sidi Ifni), or cedes some small parts that leave the Melilla-Nador-Cabo Tres Forcas and the Ceuta-Tetouan areas in Spain. These places would soon be integrated into Spain as autonomous communities outright, perhaps as part of a true federal system(which could stave off some stirrings for separatism among the Basques and Catalans in the long-run). (It's just a proposal though; as I'd love to see some alternate history from the Maghreb)

As for Western Sahara, perhaps with Spanish help, they might actually be independent (perhaps with Cap Juby and/or Sidi Ifni) attached for good measure.

As for Portugal, since Macao seems to be part of Portugal(strike that part, since I know that Macao is an independent state instead of part of Portugal, but point still stands), I'm beginning to wonder what other parts of the former empire could it possibly maintain (like Cape-Verde, Sao-Tome, and possibly East Timor and Cabinda) Goa would of course, be impossible to reatin (especially by the 1960s and 70s), as would (the rest of) Angola and Mozambique.

2) Regarding Armenia and Azerbaijan - Perhaps some changes could be an alternate division where Nakhchivan and Nagorno-Karabakh, plus any additional territories linking the latter to the rest of Armenia, be given to the Armenian SSR. Then, come 1991, the Azerbaijanis attack (with perhaps an ethnic Azeri revolt in Nakhchevan), but since Russia avoids the worst of the 90s troubles AFAICT, and Armenia AFAIK is pro-Russian in some sense, it turns into a stalemate that lasts to this day.

3) Regarding Malaya - Since North Borneo is independent, I think it might snowball into one where the Straits Settlements (Malacca, Penang, and Dinding) possibly join Singapore as well as a united Straits Federation (or something to that effect)

BTW, I'm also wondering what happened to the whole "Gran Colombia" proposal that some were also talking about, since I thought it was kind of good, yet it seems to have been abandoned.

--GR1995 (talk) 16:53, August 26, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for more suggestions.

In regards to Spain, I've actually been toying around with this same idea (more or less). My reasoning for which is that Spain would retain close relations with Japan following WWII, allowing Franco to retain much of Spain's holdings. However, I still need to do more research on the matter before I feel comfortable canonizing it.

As for Portugal, the main reason they "lost" so much of their overseas territorial is because they willingly gave it all up. Following the Carnation Revolution, the new Portuguese government wanted to focus more on Portugal itself, allowing their colonies to go at it alone (which many wanted). For this timeline, I don't see them doing anything more than OTL. Maybe they are convinced to hold onto Cape Verde (which almost happened OTL), but I'm not too sure (perhaps if Franco is more assertive over Spain's colonies). It should also be added that Macau gains independence during the 1970s, which is attributed to it having a larger area. Also, Cabinda would be annexed by the Congo.

I doubt the boundaries between Armenia and Azerbaijan would've been altered during the Soviet era. My original scenario would be to have Nagorno-Karabakh be annexed by Armenia during the 1990s. However, I wish to do more research before anything becomes canon.

It should be noted that North Borneo would achieve independence well after the Federation of Malaya was established (meaning the Strait Settlements were already incorporated). It should also be noted that one of the main reasons Singapore never became fully absorbed into Malaysia is because of demographics. Malaysia being Malay and Muslim, while Singapore is Chinese.

In regards to Gan Colombia, it was originally canon until I got rid of it years ago. My original plan was to have an Americanesque state in South America (something akin to what Simon Bolivar originally intended). Over time, I felt that such a state was too cumbersome and overambitious for the timeline as a whole, so I nixed it. -- NuclearVacuum 18:43, August 26, 2016 (UTC)

For Portugal, I could suggest taking a cue from Reagent's awesome map on an alternate Portugal (which is the basis for my suggestions about Portugal; link below) and have Antonio de Spinola be a bit loyal to the Estado Novo than OTL (perhaps goaded by Franco's retention of parts of Spanish Morocco, now that I think about it), butterflying the Carnation Revolution by a few years. I'll also post the description along with it, just so you get an idea:

[2]

I would also actually admit though that even with those changes at that PoD, Cabinda could still be overrun by the Simbas, but it's a proposal that could be looked into.

Also worth noting is that the other Straits Settlements also had high populations of Chinese and Indians as well (Penang is curently around 39.2% Chinese and 3.1% Indian according to Wikipedia, while Malacca has around 28.5% and 5.1% respectively). Given enough circumstances (like say Britain decidng to keep the Strait Settlements united or less Malay migration, particularly when Malaysia started existing IOTL) and perhaps you could keep them together in some Straits Federation independent of Malaya.

-GR1995 (talk) 19:36, August 26, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the map and timeline link. However, please refrain from copy and pasting large descriptions in the future.

All-in-all, I still feel this is too bulky for this timeline. Though it should be added that the primary reason I'm against this is because I'm already working on a timeline (Wilt of the Carnation) which follows a similar scenario. No point in having two timelines with the same situation. I do hope you understand. -- NuclearVacuum 19:49, August 26, 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't realize that you were making another TL about it and was concerned with conflict-of-interest, so sorry about that. :)

Also, you also read the second part (about the Straits Settlements), right? GR1995 (talk) 20:08, August 26, 2016 (UTC)

Also, I was also wondering: with the Mormons largely settled in Borealia, could OTL Mormon-American politicians like John Huntsman and Mitt Romney be Borealian politicians (with Romney perhaps as a future PM or something)

And what of Glenn Beck (as he was born in what would be Columbia, Alaska)? Perhaps he might be an English-Alaskan conservative commentator?

And also what happens to the political leanings of Cuban-Americans had Cuba been a state.GR1995 (talk) 01:11, August 27, 2016 (UTC)

Please forgive me for the delayed response. A lot has been happening over the past few days.

The first thing that I would like to point out is that you should do more reading on the timeline. In regards to both Mitt Romney and Glenn Beck, both have been canonized within this timeline. Romney is the PM of Borealia, while Beck is a political commentator and a Doug (English Alaskan).

As for the Strait Settlements, I wish to apologize in that I was completely unaware of its full history. After a crash course on their history, I feel it is safe to say that I'm more on board with them remaining united in ATL. However, I have come to this conclusion differently from what you originally proposed.

Based on the canon of the timeline, Axis-backed China would launch an invasion of the Malay Peninsula during World War II. This would be done on the guise of reuniting the lands occupied by ethnic Chinese. Though they would not get as far as Japan in OTL, I feel they could take Singapore with Europe in chaos. That being said, this POD could alter the area in favor of a continued Strait Settlements.

First, the Chinese occupiers would [likely] spread the ideals that Chinese were superior to the native Malays (which some settlers may buy). Though the more noticeable outcome would be the Malays becoming far more anti-Chinese than in OTL. Following the defeat of China, I could see many Chinese settlers fleeing to the coastal cities in order to escape harassment (or worse) by the Malays and returning British forces (the latter being less of a threat).

Because of these differences, I could see all parties coming to the conclusion that establishing a Federation of Malaya (as in OTL) would be both undesired by the populous and could cause more internal conflict in the long run. I could also see the collapse of the Dutch East Indies and the rise of Japan being more factors for the British.

Beyond that, I'm not too sure what would become of the Strait Settlements. Very unlikely they would remain a British colony for long. Either they become a dominion (a la Hong Kong) or they completely gain independence (a la Singapore). I'd also suspect that that the name "Strait Settlements" would be dropped upon any independence. Perhaps a Chinese name is adopted, or they use the name "Malacca" (due to its historic and geographic importance). -- NuclearVacuum 01:21, September 3, 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I did some snooping around before you responded and you're right.

As to the Straits Settlements, I kind of like the PoD, with the anti-Chinese riots being strong enough that the Chinese flee to the Settlements to tip the balance. I kind of also think there would be an exodus of Malays as well after independence (not unlike what happened to India and Pakistan after partition)

As to their governance, I think a Dominion would be fine (as Hong Kong as you said is already a Dominion, and it might work just as fine for them). For the name, "Malacca" is already used for the one of the "Settlements" so it might not be used. I kind of like the "Straits Federation", as it would probably be a politically neutral term for what's certainly to be a federation of Penang, Singapore, Malacca, and Dinding.

ie: Straits Federation (English)
叻嶼呷/海峽 聯邦 Lèyǔxiā/Hǎixiá Liánbāng (Mandarin Chinese?)

Also of note is that Singapore also held the Cocos (Keeling) Islands and Christmas Island before they were transferred to Australia in 1955 (Wikipedia: Meanwhile, the Cocos (or Keeling) Islands and Christmas Island were transferred to Australian control in 1955 viz. 1958, combined in 1996 to form the Australian Indian Ocean Territories.) Perhaps with the Straits Federation (whatever we want to call it) might retain those two islands instead. GR1995 (talk) 00:06, September 4, 2016 (UTC)

Do forgive me for the long delay in responding.

I will need to do more reading before I feel comfortable adding this to the timeline, so some things may be changed in the future.

My main "issue" (be it an OCD one) would be that I'm unable to find a proper demonym for the residence of the Straits Settlements. The only one I've been able to find is "Straits" being used (Straits citizen, Straits dollar, etc.). Hence why I wanted to change the name. But like I said, this is my OCD talking (rather than a really deterrent).

Since there is no uniform name used for such a nation, I was thinking about adopting the name "Straits States," mostly because of alliteration.

I've also read about the two islands in question. Very likely they would remain "Straits" if the colony were to remain in tact. Though if the colony were to gain full independence, than this might be an issue. -- NuclearVacuum 19:39, September 20, 2016 (UTC)

Hey there.

I think the "Straits States" kind of sound reasonable, so I don't see why not.

And now that I think about it, if Hong Kong largely becomes a Commonwealth realm at this point in the TL, it is simply more likely that the Straits States become a Commonwealth realm as well. GR1995 (talk) 16:23, September 24, 2016 (UTC)

Glad to hear that you like the name suggestion. Though it should be noted that this would likely be the English name, while the Chinese name could be very different (translation-wise).

It should be noted that I still find it probable that the SS would gain independence as a republic. My reasoning for this is because of Lee Kuan Yew (who I'd assume would still come to power). Lee was very keen on securing Singapore's independence. He did this by campaigning for unification with Malaya to form Malaysia (which would be off the table for ATL). Since Lee also espoused regionalism (which would likely still exist here), I find it unlikely that he would favor becoming a dominion of the Commonwealth. The only option that remains would be to become a fully independent republic, likely structured similarly to OTL's Singapore. Given Singapore's size and importance, I don't see why the other settlements wouldn't follow along.

By comparison, Hong Kong would take a longer time to become independent. Though possibly earlier than OTL, it would still be well after the SS. Hong Kongers were also more open to the British and would likely favor becoming a dominion. This is also because they are more at threat from Japan's influence (ATL).

I would also like to add that I'm beginning to have doubts about the Cocos Islands remaining a part of the SS. They were transferred over to Australia in 1955 (well before independence) and their population is very small and non-Chinese. In all honesty, they'd likely still be given to Australia. That being said, this would not be the case for Christmas Island. It's population is larger and a Chinese majority. Though they were transferred in 1957 (still before independence), they were only done so on request from Australia (which had to pay for them). Given the ethnic issues related to the SS in ATL, it should be easy enough for the Chinese colonists to request remaining with the SS (which the British would likely comply with).

Does all this sound okay with you? -- NuclearVacuum 04:07, September 25, 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess this is kind of reasonable on both counts.

Anyways, would you like me to begin writing the article? I can start with the infobox and then you can write some history based on our discussions. GR1995 (talk) 11:22, September 26, 2016 (UTC)

Another Question

I'm back, and I have a little question: basically how might Alex Hirsch fare in this world, and whether something like Gravity Falls might be altered in this world. --GR1995 (talk) 20:35, July 29, 2017 (UTC)

Sandbox Stuff

Hello, i have read Your sandbox  and have some norices.

• Большенога - incorrect translation for bigefoot because it is feminine. Мale version is большеног.
• More correct translation for Dunkin' Donuts is Моченые Пончики. But btw weird name for cofeehouse i would not go to it :)
• Grunge - Грязь
• Speaking about Ded Moroz and Santa Claus. Ded Moroz became the surrogate of Santa Claus in USSR (1930s) to reaplzce Capitalist Santa . So I believe that in Russian America there would be only Santa Claus.
• Dog service - собачья служба
• United parcel service - единая служба посылок
• Speaking about Russian-American Company or Alaskan Comercial Comany - second name is better because abbreviation for first is РАК - litteraly translated as cancor or lobster. Bad name for trade comany because in russian slang rak is somebody unskillful.
• About russian google. Не за что is long in my subjective opinion. But it can be shotened to НЗЧ(russian internet slang)

P.S Sorry if i wrote it in wrong place. I cannot write in Your talk page.

Thank you so much for your insight and suggestions. I will keep these in mind for the future. -- NuclearVacuum 01:16, February 9, 2017 (UTC)

May I offer minor corrections in spelling and grammar?

Everything is well-written and fascinating -- but in such a huge work, there are a few small details that I noticed.

Vaslov (talk) 13:52, March 26, 2017 (UTC) "Vaslov"

AKA Kev11sky@aol.com

What Happens With the Philippines?

So, because the USA has Cuba we can assume they won the Spanish American War, but OTL America got the philippines. This probably wouldn't happen in this timeline because American isn't really a pacific power. I propose that Mexico is an ally with America during the Spanish-American War and actually takes the philippines, perhaps having a similar history to OTL except the Philippine-American War would be the Philippine-Mexican War and stuff like that.The Expendable Broccoli Rob (Say Hi!) 08:10, September 8, 2017 (UTC)

I believe this has already been talked about, but perhaps we never wrote it down.

What is currently canon (or headcanon) is that the Spanish-American War have little difference from OTL. The US still wins and still wins Guam and the Philippines in the war. Despite not having as big of a footing in the Pacific as OTL, the US would likely not be detoured from going to war here. They are in no-worse of a position as was Germany or Spain during this timeline).

The big difference for this timeline is that Cuba and the Philippines switch in importance. The US is more keen to organize and absorb Cuba (which becomes a state), while the Philippines are given more autonomy and independence (perhaps with their own variant of the Platt Amendment). Any conflict between the US and the Philippines would be minimal, as they mostly sought independence.

As for your suggestion for a Mexican Philippines, I'm not sure what to make of it (mostly from a lack of knowledge). In the long-run, I don't see it being palatable, as Mexico would likely loose the islands during the Mexican Revolution just years later.

I do hope this clears-up any confusion. -- NuclearVacuum 19:54, September 8, 2017 (UTC)

Mexico would lose the islands during the Mexican Revolution, but it could prompt Japan to invade them during World War 1 as the Mexican Gov't was allied with Germany.

The Expendable Broccoli Rob (Say Hi!) 01:03, September 9, 2017 (UTC)

Spain

I'm back.

I've recently looked upon your sandbox with regards to Spain and Western Sahara, particularly with the set of articles about a Republican victory in the Civil War. So I can assume that this will be a TL where the Nationalists flee back to Spanish Sahara and the Canary Islands (a la Taiwan) and create their own little fascist statelet that eventually transitions to democracy. If so, I would love to give a few ideas.

1) I can assume that it would contain Spanish Morrocco (the Spanish protectorate and Ifni), Spanish Sahara (OTL Western Sahara and Cape Juby), and the Canary Islands. Later, it might also contain the international city of Tangiers, which could be occupied by the Spanish

2) Capital - While it is tempting to place it in the Canary Islands (like say in Tenerife), a better idea might be in Tetuán, since it is generally closer to the Spanish mainland, which the Nationalists might consider since they'll want to reclaim their homelands from the Spanish Republic.

3) I'm guessing that the Morroccans would be none too pleased at this arrangement (since they claim the terrirories in Africa as their own like IOTL). This might lead to a series of wars and frozen conflicts along their shared border.

4) The butterflies are going to be immense in this part of Africa. A settler state that is going to be filled with Spaniards (particularly Nationalists) in might convince the Pied-Noirs to fight on, which could lead to parts of Algeria being retained by France (which before independence, considered it to be part of the metropole itself)

Just my pieces of eight. GR1995 (talk) 02:31, March 3, 2018 (UTC)

(This conversation will be moved to your talk page). -- NuclearVacuum 02:47, March 3, 2018 (UTC)

Merging of the Wilt of the Carnation Timeline

I'm happy to announce that my adopted timeline, Wilt of the Carnation, will now be merged into this timeline. The primary reasons for doing so are practicality and optimism. I feel that incorporating these two timelines will allow the POD and premise of the Wilt of the Carnation to not only thrive, but expand. Stay tuned for more. -- NuclearVacuum 16:13, April 12, 2018 (UTC)

Italy

I created a proposal for the timeline. It is a Italy that is still under the Savoy monarchy. It is my first proposal to the timeline.DasBull$ (talk) 22:35, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

Wow, thank you so very much. I'm very happy that you're interested in the timeline.

I know I haven't written it down before, but here's the backstory for how Italy ended the way it did IATL. With Japan being an ally during World War II (and Axis China not being as imminent of a threat), the United States would deploy more men and resources to Europe. With more American soldiers in Italy, this frees more Italians to return home. Because of this, the constitutional referendum of 1946 is skewed more in favor of retaining the monarchy. (LG was the one who suggested this years back).

With the monarchy being retained, the Allies wouldn't be as "kind" to Italy's territory. France demands and gains the Aosta Valley. South Tyrol is granted a referendum and votes to join Austria. Finally, the Province of Gorizia is included within the Free Territory of Trieste, which is fully annexed into Yugoslavia down the line (being pushed by Alaska). Aside from these losses, Italy would remain the same (aside from being a constitutional monarchy).

The only two things I'd wish to add are:

1. Italy would not include territory from France. This was a map error I made years back and have since corrected it.
2. Not sure who "Amadues" is, but this timeline doesn't allow fictional personas. Looking at the family tree, Umberto II would reign as King until 1983. He would than [likely] be succeeded by his son Vittorio Emanuele, who would [most likely] reign under the name "Victor Emmanuel IV". He would be the current king, unless he decided to follow the band wagon and abdicate in favor of his son (just like the Netherlands and Spain did in recent years). Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy could be the current king (perhaps under the name "Emmanuel Philibert II" [Emmanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy]). Personally, I kinda like the latter option.

Other than that, thank you once again. Can't wait to read more. -- NuclearVacuum 03:09, April 22, 2018 (UTC)

You are very welcome, Nuke. In this version of Italy, I added Prince Amedeo, Duke of Aosta as the King of Italy (as King Amedeo I or King Amadues I). In our timeline, Prince Amedeo is a claimant to the throne and rival to Victor Emmanuel, Prince of Naples. I was thinking that if the monarchy were to be retained, then Victor Emmanuel II's branch would still be deposed in favor of the Duke of Aosta. If it is not a plausible scenario or not canon to the timeline, then I will change it to the Prince of Naples (who would be King Victor Emmanuel IV).DasBull$ (talk) 03:33, April 22, 2018 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for clarifying this.

I'm still very new when it comes to monarchies and their line of succession, so correct me if I'm wrong. Since Umberto II was the reigning monarch of Italy at the time of the 1946 referendum (having been made king after the abdication of this father), Umberto II would remain the monarch until his death and it would go onto his son. Because the monarchy remained, wouldn't the infighting effectively be butterflied away?

From what I'm reading, the issue appears to be over Vittorio Emanuele marrying without the consent of his father? This kinda sounds like the same issue with Edward VIII, who abdicated in order to marry an outsider. I guess this could still be an issue here. Perhaps the reigning king's order would be more finite here?

Your thoughts? -- NuclearVacuum 03:59, April 22, 2018 (UTC)

Quickly wanted to add this. If Prince Amedeo is, indeed, the current king, I think it would be more appropriate that his monarchical name be "Amadeus X" (since the House of Savoy already had nine previous monarchs of the same name). -- NuclearVacuum 04:07, April 22, 2018 (UTC)

I also chose the Duke of Aosta as King partly due to the controveries surrounding the Prince of Naples. Such controveries include the killing of Dirk Hamer (for which he was responisble for), unliteral declaration of kingship, alleged anti-semitism, an assualt on the Duke of Aosta (his rival for the throne) at a dinner held by the King of Spain, a criminal record (including the killing of Dirk Hamer), and his demands for compensation by the Italian Republic. This is even to the point were Prince Emanuele Filiberto reportedly decided to distance himself from his father. The Prince of Naples' history along with the fact that his grandfather allowed a fascist to gain power made me think that Italy would depose his branch of the family in favor of the Dukes of Aosta if the Italian monarchy was never abolished. As for the previous Kings named Amadeus, I was unaware of that fact, I was sure that the Duke of Aosta would be the first one named Amadeus if he were to become King of Italy. I will say that is an interesting fact. DasBull$ (talk) 04:16, April 22, 2018 (UTC)

Yep. One of the key things I've learned about monarchies is that they are weird and unpredictable. XP

Other than that, I'm convinced and set for the reign of Amedeus X of Italy. But as I mentioned before, there is always the possibility that the king may follow the bandwagon and abdicate to a younger generation. Beatrix of the Netherlands and Juan Carlos I of Spain did so in recent years (perhaps more, but I don't recall at the moment). Amedeo is about the same age as both previously mentioned monarchs were when they resigned, so this could still be a potability. If so, than Prince Aimone, Duke of Apulia (son of Amedeo) could be the current monarch. Any thoughts on this? (open to either).

Also wanted to add that I've cleaned-up the infobox of your article. Added a few missing things and simplified others to keep it in line with other articles. Truly hope you don't mind. -- NuclearVacuum 21:03, April 23, 2018 (UTC)

I agree with the possibilty of King Amedeus of Italy abdicating in favor of his son, but then again, King Harald V of Norway is aged 81 and he has not abdicated and is not known to have plans to do so. But granted, considering his age it is possible. As for the recent edits, I do not mind. But in fact, I appreciate them. DasBull$ (talk) 23:49, April 23, 2018 (UTC)

No worries. Just the fact that multiple monarchs agree to abdicate recently (including Japan of all places), it's at least a conversation worth having.

Glad to hear you don't mind. -- NuclearVacuum 01:48, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

Just saw your recent additions to the article, and wanted to make a clarification. I thought we agreed that Umberto II would still become king (since his father abdicated IOTL). Umberto's son (Vittorio Emanuele) would be cut out of the line of succession in favor of Prince Amedeo (who would only take the thrown after Umberto II's death in 1983). -- NuclearVacuum 04:18, April 25, 2018 (UTC)

Forgive me, I was thinking that the Duke of Aosta line would depose the main branch following the Second World War, as it seemed to be the most realistic scenario to me. King Victor Emmanuel was already unpopular at the time. But you are right, I will make the necessary corrections. Please forgive me.DasBull$ (talk) 14:51, April 25, 2018 (UTC)

New Idea For the Philippines

Alright, so the Philippines are obviously not annexed into the US so this leaves them with three possible options:

1. Become a US Influenced Republic Like Cuba. This one is very unlikely as the Philippines are in asia and would likely be taken over by some colonial power. This only worked in Cuba because the island was so close to America.

2. Become a Mexican Colony. There is a possible scenario where the enterprising Mexican Empire, hoping to establish itself on the world stage, joins the Spanish-American War and siezes the colony. This would mean spanish would probably be the official language as opposed to Tagalog and the philippines would either gain independence or pass to another colonial power after the Mexican revolution.

3. Become a German Colony. This seems the most likely scenario as Germany already had designs on the philippines when they were rebelling against Spain (I forget where I read this but I remember that German ships attempted to dock in a Filipino Port to take over the country). Germany probably could have also dealt with the rebellion much as they had dealt with other rebellions in their other colonies in a very brutal way (ala Herero and Namaqua Genocides).

I personally favor the second scenario as it seems more interesting, although the third scenario is more likely. If mexico is a central power, then the Philippines could be siezed as an American, Japanese, or British Colony. This would be the same if it was a German Colony. I would predict either a British or Japanese Colony. This would lead it to either becoming a commonwealth realm or another Korea.

As we previously discussed, the timeline for the Philippines has already been set. The United States still gains them in the Spanish-American War. Rather than establishing a territory, the Philippines is granted independence in a manner similar to Cuba IOTL. Philippine independence would not happen immediately (just as with Cuba), but it would happen within a decade or so after the war. The Philippines would become a banana republic of the United States (again, like Cuba) and would receive American backing in case of war. The only addition I'd add is the possibility of a revolution in the 1950s, with the Philippines becoming a Soviet or (more likely) Japanese ally (a la Cuba IOTL).

As I mentioned before, I don't see any reason or capability for Mexico to gain the Philippines (regardless of year). They were too far apart to remain together in the 1820s. I highly doubt they'd side with the United States in the SAW, especially with the US gaining the Spanish-speaking Cuba et al. Mexico would have zero interest after the Mexican Revolution. Even if we expand the concept to include Russia backing their Mexican allies to take the islands, this would only spark conflict with the British and French. All-in-all, this idea simply isn't workable for this particular timeline (sorry to say). -- NuclearVacuum 01:05, May 17, 2018 (UTC)

Soccer in Alaska and the 2026 World Cup

So the 2018 World Cup is on right now, and given that, I just want some insight as to the soccer scene in Alaska (and maybe some of its neighbors):

• Status of soccer in Alaska - You mentioned that gridiron football still becomes the dominant sport (alongside hockey) in Alaska, so maybe soccer there becomes something of a niche sport until the 1990s/2000s (or maybe earlier due to the proximity with Mexico). Also pertinent is the Alaskan national team and if they somehow compete in the World Cup at some point.

• Major League Soccer - There are at present three teams for cities that are in Alaska ITTL (Portland Timbers, Seattle Sounders, and Vancouver Whitecaps). Does MLS (if it still exist) still expand to Alaska and if so, do these teams still exist (maybe with different names, and possibly with different cities)

• 2026 World Cup - As you probably know by now, the United States (alongside Canada and Mexico) is going to host the 2026 World Cup. My question would be if Alaska decides to join with the U.S., Mexico, (and possibly Texas, Canada, and Borealia)

Just my two yefimki worth. GR1995 (talk) 23:50, June 16, 2018 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to answer your questions. Just be aware that I'm still a n00b when it comes to sports in general (so be warned).

• Alaskan Soccer — I'm still debating with myself on how prevalent soccer would be in Alaska. My guess is that Alaskans would've been more drawn to North American sports as a symbol of independence and regionalism (hence an American-styled football). The only issue to take into account would be Mexico and the Dougs (the British settlers in Alaska).
  • Mexico — Unless the existence of Alaska [et al.] butterflies soccer out of Mexico, my guess is that it'd still become popular there.
  • Dougs — Unlike their continental brethren, the Dougs would wish to associate themselves with their British roots (especially to distinguish themselves from both the Russians and the Americans). This makes me believe that soccer would gain popularity and spread outside the Doug communities. I've also been playing around with a similar situation happening with cricket.

• Major League Soccer — Too be fair, I didn't know that such a thing existed until just now (n00b showing). I don't think it'd be fare to comment until I have more insight into the league. All I can add is that some kind of soccer league would operate here. But for your second question, I don't believe those teams you mentioned would exist here. Based on my experience with creating hockey teams, their creating is more personalized and circumstantial. It'd be far more likely that alternate teams would exist in Alaska.

• 2026 World Cup — Yep, well aware of it. ;) As an American, I obligated to say... USA! USA! All joking aside, my guess is that this arrangement would not exist ITTL. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is the first time that three countries shared a bid together. The thought of expanding it to five, six, or even seven countries (just to include the same cities/areas of OTL) seems too chaotic and monstrous to be workable. My guess is that this united bid wouldn't exist. If I had to chose at the moment, it'd be the US that gets the bid. Even losing their venues in the west and Texas, they'd still have Toronto. They could also add a venue in Havana if they'd wanted. That, or we could have Alaska win the bid on their own.

All-in-all, my best guess is that Alaskans would be more fond of soccer (compared to the Americans). I find it very likely they would've participated in the World Cup at least once. My current ranking of sports in Alaska would look something like this (but subject to change):

1. Ice Hockey
2. Basketball
3. Gridiron Football
4. Baseball
5. Soccer
6. Cricket

If you are interested, you are more than welcome to participate and expand upon this within the timeline. Up to you. Hope this answers your questions. -- NuclearVacuum 02:51, June 18, 2018 (UTC)

OK Just got around to replying, so here goees:

For MLS, since you mentioned that the Dougs will be more drawn to soccer than other Alaskans (plus given that two of the three teams in Alaska (the Sounders and Whitecaps) are in Columbia, I would probably suggest that those two teams might certainly exist (maybe rename the Sounders to something that goes well with TTL's Duwamps), with one or two additional teams in Ross (home to Alaska's hispanic population; also they could replace the San Jose Earthquakes given that the southern Bay Area (as would much of Alta California, so no LA Galaxy/RSL/LAFC) would be in Mexico and thus whatever teams that exist there would play in Liga MX), and either in Nikolayevsk or Vladikaskady.

I could also add that since MLS has three teams in Canada, it's quite possible to have the league expand into Canada (probably just one team for Montreal) and Texas (a possible two or three, given that Texas IOTL already has two teams, plus a third if the Columbus Crew moves to Austin).

Sort of like this really (this still assumes at least 28 teams as per the latest round of expansion, as their plans call for):

• 18-22 in the United States (including one in Havana and possibly in Santiago de Cuba or San Juan)
• 3-4 in Alaska (Duwamps, New Westminster, Ross, and/or Nikolayevsk/Vladikaskady)
• 2-3 in Texas (Dallas, Houston, and (possibly Austin)
• 1 in Canada (the Montreal Impact)
• Possibly one each for Borealia and Acadia (really depends really)

GR1995 (talk) 19:42, June 19, 2018 (UTC)

Do forgive me for the delayed response. Been taking some time off from the Wiki. I have also done more reading on the MLS and soccer in general (so I should be able to shed more light than before).

As of right now, I feel confident that soccer would be regarded as one of the five major sports of the nation. Ice Hockey would still surpass soccer; with basketball, baseball, and [gridiron] football being the remaining games. All-in-all, I expect soccer to be more popular in Alaska than in the USA, but not as a much as the global average. In short, think of Alaskan soccer being in between American soccer and the rest of the world (in terms of popularity).

From my research in both the NHL and the MLS, I highly doubt any of the teams (IOTL) would exist outside the United States. This is because teams/clubs are [in general] created at random and are open to random changes (depending on the environment). I also wish to take the ancestries of individuals into account. I'm also ignoring the fact that the Pacific Northwestern teams of the MLS (today) are the reincarnations of previously established teams decades prior (see North American Soccer League (1968–84)). This isn't to say teams/clubs wouldn't exist in these areas, just that they wouldn't be the exact same teams/clubs from OTL. I know this sounds confusing, so please forgive me.

When it comes to the MLS, I would suggest keeping the league Anglo-centric (focusing mostly on the USA and the other English-speaking nations on the continent). That being said, I don't see why two or three teams from Alaska can't participate in the league (not to mention a club from Canada-Quebec). It would be interesting to see these Alaskan teams participating in the league in order to help promote soccer there. I also feel that an Alaskan-specific soccer league would/should exist (likely decades older than the MLS).

Do hope I haven't forgotten anything. Look forward to your reply. -- NuclearVacuum 02:16, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

I already seen the sandbox with the All-Alaskan Soccer Union (which I presume is Alaskan soccer's governing body). With regards to MLS, I actually agree that we should keep the focus to the U.S. and Borealia, with at least three teams from Alaska and one in Canada(Quebec), so there's not much argument. 

Also, I'm pretty sure I got the message that those teams (at least in the Pacific Northwest in their present forms) would be butterflied away and most likely be given different names (In fact, I already suggested the Seattle Sounders be renamed to something else since that city goes by Duwamps ITTL), so there's little argument there. I look forward to seeing what the Alaskan teams could be called then - GR1995 (talk) 22:47, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

Once again, please forgive me for being late.

The "All-Alaskan Soccer Union" is intended to be the name of Alaska's soccer governing body (in reference to the governing body of the Russian Empire). I've also been toying around with naming the top-tier soccer league in Alaska as 1-ый, (1-y; lit. "1st"). Seeing as how many soccer leagues have unique name changes in recent years (e.g., the A-League in Australia), this seems clever and recognizable (marketing-wise).

I've also been scratching the surface and found a few individuals whom could be Alaskan IATL. Milan Mandarić (owner of the Oakland Stompers) is a potential pick, as well as Philip Anschutz (one of the founders of the MLS). We also have Víctor Manuel Vucetich, whose a manager in the Mexican Liga MX. I've also noticed how the Croat/Yugoslav communities across North America helped to mainstream soccer here. I'm fairly certain the same would happen in Alaska, so perhaps we'd have teams named after them (e.g., Toronto Croatia).

As for team names, anything is possible (really). -- NuclearVacuum 15:48, July 6, 2018 (UTC)

Bavaria and Prussia

I hope you don't mind, but I decided to contribute to Russian America once again by creating an article for Bavaria.DasBull$ (talk) 05:31, August 12, 2018 (UTC)

I do have a question in the regards of Prussia, why is it named Prussia? I am confused since the Kaliningrad Oblast is the region of Prussia. DasBull$ (talk) 17:38, August 12, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Always happy when you (or anyone for that matter) feels compelled to propose and article.

I took the liberty to clean-up the infobox of the article (hope you don't mind). I also wanted to add that Bavaria would not join NATO ITTL. For all intense and purposes, Bavaria would be VERY close with neighboring Austria (and Switzerland, to a lesser extent). Because of which, I feel Bavaria would make follow the neutrality band wagon. Other than that, I don't have much else in mind for Bavaria (at the moment), so I look forward to seeing what you have in mind.

As for the continued use of the name Prussia, the simple answer is Berlin. By 1945, the name had been continuously used for an area stretching across northern Germany, but still centered around Berlin and Brandenburg. Despite the loss of Königsberg (Kaliningrad), the name Prussia would likely stick to what ever state Berlin was in/around (with little opposition).

Basically, chalk it up to being another quirk of European naming. -- NuclearVacuum 20:29, August 12, 2018 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the clarification about Prussia. I guess that it make sense since Berlin was the capital of the Kingdom and Free State of Prussia since the coronation of King Frederick I. I'm actually thinking of creating a timeline where the Soviet regime sets up Königsberg (Kaliningrad) as a homeland and new Soviet republic for the Volga Germans after annexing the territory and expelling the original population.

Anyway, it makes sense for Bavaria to maintain a policy of neutrality due to her cultural and historical links with Austria. I originally intended to have the monarchy restored, but I felt that it would have been completely unrealistic and I don't want to be seen as a monarchist propagandist. I do wonder if Bavaria would be a member state of the European Union like Austria or not join the organization like Switzerland and Liechtenstein. Since most German Americans came from Bavaria, I do imagine the two countries would have some sort of a good relationship.DasBull$ (talk) 21:14, August 13, 2018 (UTC)

I've created a page for Romania for the timeline. I decided to make Romania restore her monarchy after a coup d'état. The basis for this coup is the result of the nation's recent history of political corruption as well as the small but growing and vocal monarchist movement combined with the popularity of King Michael. I'm also interested in contributing further by creating a Czechoslovakia or Bulgaria page.DasBull$ (talk) 20:04, August 13, 2018 (UTC)

No worries, you get used to it after a while (naming-wise). I'm also going to be messaging you about your Kaliningrad timeline idea (seems inappropriate to discuss it here).

I firmly believe Bavaria would join the EU and adopt the euro (especially if Austria does as well). For all it's worth, most of the EU/NATO/euro would remain in place (give or take a few outliers [Iberia]).

Agree that restoring the Bavarian monarchy would be a bit odd, best to keep it a republic. No need to worry about being a monarchist propagandist (so long as you don't let it cloud your judgement). XP

Thank you for creating two more articles. In the future, please provide links to them (for easier viewing).

Funny that you should bring up restoring the monarchy in Romania, because I have been toying around with the idea in Romania's neighbors. Albania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia (ATL) have the potential to restore their monarchies following communism. The royal families regained their citizenships and many were indeed popular. In fact, Bulgaria's former king (Simeon II) returned and was elected as Prime Minister. Albania held a referendum on the issue in 1997.

For this timeline, I believe there could exist more support for restoring the monarchs. One of the reasons could be backing from Alaska (or rather Alaskans). I believe the Eastern Orthodox Alaska would serve as an ally for many of these exiled monarchs, perhaps many had resided in Alaska (as opposed to Western Europe). They gain more notoriety and funding from Alaskans, which help them persuade their nations to retake them after communism. This is a very rough idea, so forgive me for its sloppiness.

In the case of Romania, my guess is that the chaos and dissatisfaction of Nicolae Ceaușescu (combined with foreign backing), perhaps we could see a monarchy referendum in the early to mid 1990s (winning of course). When it comes to Michael's successor, I'm not too sure. In all likelihood, a new constitution would need to be adopted for Romania (obviously) that allows women to take the throne (if you wish for Margareta to be the current Queen). If Michael's popularity is strong enough, I guess it isn't out of the question for the people/parliament to change the rules to allow for a Queen. It would than pass on to her sister (Elena), and than from Elena to her son (Nicholas).

Also... Irina (that is all). -- NuclearVacuum 23:52, August 13, 2018 (UTC)

Before I forget to mention, I've also been playing around with Czechoslovakia remaining a unitary state and the idea of Czechoslovakism being successful (more or less). -- NuclearVacuum 01:30, August 14, 2018 (UTC)

I like your ideas for the Balkans better. In my opinion, if Alaska were to support a monarchist restoration in the region it would likely be Bulgaria or Yugoslavia, since they are fellow Slavic and Eastern Orthodox nations. Romania is also a Eastern Orthodox nation, but not a Slavic country, but I guess that Alaska could support Romania as well.

Even though the monarchy has not been restored, King Michael made it clear that he wanted his daughters to be in the line of succession to the throne. Even though Romania is presently a republic, I believe that Michael wanted a more stable line of succession in the event the monarchy could be restored. Likely, I believe that Michael would've got his wishes with a constitutional amendment.

As for my Königsberg/Kaliningrad idea, I do agree that it was not related. I just get over excited XD

DasBull$ (talk) 03:45, August 14, 2018 (UTC)

RAFL Structure/Teams

So (looking from your sandbox), I also noted that you also had ideas for a gridiron football league in Alaska (the RAFL). I would like to inquire about the structure of the league (how many teams are there (or at least you were planning to have) and what are the team names. --GR1995 (talk) 15:23, November 21, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your question (forgive me for the delayed reply).

As of right now, I haven't gotten into specifics related to "Russian American football" (other than that it exists). The league could comprise of anywhere between 16 to 30 teams (probably closer to the former). I haven't considered any team names as of now, but I feel certain that the majority of them (most likely) would be located southeast of the Columbia River (with the northern teams being expansions/experiments). The southern governorates would be regarded as the "football belt" (where American-styled football was introduced and enjoyed the most). The Doug governorates would be the "soccer belt" (being more pro-British), while the rest of the nation was devoid of American football until after the Russian Revolution.

Potential Size Comparison.

Since I have a Pre-K level of understanding of American football, I couldn't possibly explain any rule differences which may exist in this league. The only significant change I can see is that the Russian American football field would be partitioned into arshins (the pre-metric Russian unity closest to yards/meters). The field would be kept as close to 100 [American] yards as possible, meaning an Alaskan football field would be 130 arshins (about 101 yards).

Hope this answers some of your questions. As mentioned before, you have my support if you'd like to work out a league structure for the timeline. -- NuclearVacuum 19:34, November 24, 2018 (UTC)

Should be "130 аршинов". — Hellerick 08:17, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, Hellerick. Much appreciation. -- NuclearVacuum 23:32, November 25, 2018 (UTC)

So judging by your statement, there could be at least 8-12 teams in Sonoma, Oregon, and Idaho alone, with 4-8 teams in the rest of the country, right? Because I can cobble together a list of potential cities if that's OK.

Thus, (assuming that it's a 9-7 split), the list could include:

• Ross (two teams, with one potentially in Kuskovsk
• Zavalishino
• Vladikaskady (two teams, with one potentially in Vankuvergrad)
• Moscow-on-Zmeinaya/Shoshone
• Novospokansk
• Dolinoye Serdtse
• Pokatello
• New Westminster
• Duwamps
• Prince George
• New Archangel
• Nikolayevsk
• Nooshagak
• Davydovsk

(just my two sotki worth)GR1995 (talk) 02:13, November 27, 2018 (UTC)

Your list looks pretty good. I originally was going to say lower the number of teams north of 54-40, but these locations could work out quite well (given this, LOL). Perhaps the northernmost teams are "recent" expansions (so they are still growing). The vast majority of the teams would still be located southeast of the Columbia River.

Here's a generalized list of locations which seem appropriate.

Southeast of the Columbia River (9 teams)

• Ross/Kuskovsk (2)
• Zavalishino
• Vayrika
• Tsentralny
• Yevgenyevka
• Vladikaskady
• Vankuverovka/Saint Petersburg
• Pokatello
• Lesnoy
• Adskiye Vrata
• Novospokansk

"New Albion" and Northern Alaska (7 teams)

• Duwamps
• New Westminster
• Prince George
• Telegrafny Ruchey
• New Archangel
• Nikolayevsk-Amerikansky
• Nooshagak

If all of these locations are included, this would be a league of 16 teams, which seems fairly appropriate (if most of the northern teams are "recent" expansions). I removed Davydovsk, Dolinoye Serdtse, and Moscow-on-Zmeinaya as they are gubernial capitals (as opposed to major cities). I added Adskiye Vrata, Lesnoy, Telegrafny Ruchey, Tsentralny, Vayrika, and Yevgenyevka; as they are major cities.

Hope this helps. If I've forgotten anything, please let me know. -- NuclearVacuum 20:39, December 3, 2018 (UTC)

Also, a good guide for gridiron football could be this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_American_and_Canadian_football

Basically, it's an overview of what the major differences between American and Canadian football that I think you can try and hack your way out of to create a more unique version of Alaskan football. GR1995 (talk) 03:52, December 4, 2018 (UTC)

LOL, I'm well aware of that page. XP -- NuclearVacuum 16:36, December 11, 2018 (UTC)

BTW, Nuke, I may've forgotten this up until now, but I'm also wondering what could the potential team names we could come up. One name I could suggest (for Zavalishino's team) could be the Dragons, but that's totally up to you (because I don't know). GR1995 (talk) 21:24, February 12, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response. A lot has been happening on my end as of late. ^^;

From what I've been able to gather over the past few months is that team names are (for all intense and purposes) are not set in stone and can fluctuate on how they are chosen. Most tend to allow the town/city residence the option to chose their name in a contest or chose from a set list of predetermined names. Some teams are named after historic teams. In one instance I found, the owner of the Los Angeles Kings demanded the team be called the "Kings" (for personal reasons).

Here's an interesting video I found explaining the NFL team name origins. Perhaps it will inspire you. It starts off slow, but give it a watch.

In regards to Alaska, the ONLY significant difference I've found is related to Russian grammar rules. In English, team names are (almost) always pluralized and named after the area (e.g., New England Patriots, Mighty Ducks of Anaheim, New York Yankees, etc.). In Russian, teams are (predominantly) singularized and/or named after a specific location. Examples are Spartak Moscow ("Spartacus"), Metallurg Magnitogorsk ("Metallurgist"), Sibir Novosibirsk ("Siberia"), and CSKA Moscow (C.S.K.A. = "Central Sports Club of the Army").

As for using the name "Dragons" for Zavalishino's team, I'm neither for nor against it. Based on the criteria above, what do dragons have in relation to the city/region that would inspire a team to be named after them. But that's my two cents on the name.

Also... it would be Drakon Zavalishino in Russian. ^_^ -- NuclearVacuum 04:27, February 19, 2019 (UTC)

New book about Russian America

Russian scientist Kirill Eskov, known for The Last Ringbearer, an alternative take on The Lord of the Rings, has written a what-if take on Russian America (called Amerika: Reload Game). Is there room for it here? Blurb follows:

"What if Russia, instead of selling Alaska, had expanded its overseas possessions south, and discovered Californian gold? What if, left to their own devices far away from their government, the Russian colonists established the kind of free society others could only begin to dream of? America could have been quite different if that game could have been reloaded."

The POD is earlier than already suggested because the colonization is led by Alexander Menshikov at a much greater scale than in reality.YisroelM (talk) 17:46, January 14, 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the book recommendation. I'm actually well aware of it.

In regards to incorporating elements into the Russian America timeline, while I have no intention of changing the POD or altering what currently exists in a massive way, I have taken to include some elements from the series in one form or another.

Sorry I can't be as helpful at the moment. If you are still interested in contributing to the timeline, than please feel free to do so. I'm always open to new ideas. -- NuclearVacuum 18:02, January 14, 2020 (UTC)

Education and Voice Acting?

What would Education be in Alaska? What would Alaskans Voice Actors Look Like? - Brightonskinner182

As of right now, I haven't given much thought into the educational system of Alaska. I guesstimate it would be more comparable to that of the United States than the former USSR.

While I haven't given much thought into what voice acting would be like in Alaska, there have been minor discussions in the past. I fully believe it would be more comparable to the United States/North America instead of Eurasia. Dubbing would be the norm instead of using subtitles (which is more common in Russia). It has also been headcanon that Alaska would serve as the center of dubbing anime within the Russian speaking world.

Outside anime, I'm only aware of a few people who (based on their ancestry) would be Alaskans and (therefore) Russian-speaking voice actors ITTL. Hank Azaria, Mel Blank, and Harry Shearer are a few that I can name off the top of my head.

As of now, I have no intention of adding these subjects into the timeline, due solely on a lack of interest and time. That being said, I would 100% support you if you'd be willing to work out these articles and participate within the timeline. Feel free to skim through the Editorial Guidelines of the timeline and you have my permission to add these articles as proposals. -- NuclearVacuum 21:59, May 17, 2020 (UTC)

Another Alaskan to look at (Alek Skarlatos)?

Hi there.

I found another person of interest (Greek-American) that I think might be of use. I definitely think you should take a gander...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alek_Skarlatos

GR1995 (talk) 01:30, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Yugoslavia and German Confederation

Why Yugoslavia is still united? Does it have any deep reason (like the US or Alaska on the Serbian side)? I Think that realistic vision of Yugoslavia in this timeline is that stayed only orthodox countries (Serbia, Montenegro and North Macedonia) maybe included Bosnia and Herzegovina.

German confederation is in my mind trialistic state included Lower Saxony, Hesse and Swabia. Each of this state has high level of autonomy. This states has only same army, diplomacy and economy. This confederation was founded as buffer against comunistic Prussia.

German Confederation Flag

The main reason Yugoslavia remains together ITTL is due to Alexander I of Yugoslavia avoiding being assasinated. This gives him more time to "Yugoslavify" the country. No appeasements are made towards the Croats (as was IOTL), leading them to be more agressive during WWII (more autrocities and the like). When Tito and the communists inherit the country, Croat nationalism/independence is discredited (due to their war crimes) and a more unified infrustruture exists due to Alexander I. Combined with the fact that Germany is parititoned (see below), the ethnic policies of OTL are replaced with a more unified one.

Outside of this, relations between communist Yugoslavia and the West would be more "positive" from OTL. This was due in great part to Alaska backing-up their (non-Soviet) Slavic bretheren. So by the 1980s/90s, Yugoslavia's economy would be more stable (not perfect, but stable enough to avoid the idea of seperatism).

Germany would [unintentially] be parititoned following WWII. The biggest reason for this being France, who double down on not allowing a unified German state (seeing as they were successfully invaded three times by the Germans). Without French cooperation, the Americans and the Britih gradually give up and accept a divided Germany. The British (especially after the re-election of Winston Churchill), fully back the restoriation of the House of Hanover. The election of Konrad Adenauer would be the final nail, as his policies would fully embrase a new "Lower Saxon" indentity in the [former] British Zone. Bavaria would too relish their newly regained indepenendce, leaving the French-backed Hesse and Swabia to remain sided with the French.

After a few decades, the notion of German Reunification becomes as appealing as in OTL's Austria (i.e., not fully neccessary). With the formation of NATO and the EU, all of the German-speaking states would be [for all intents and purposes] reunified (all have open borders, all use the euro, etc.). The need for a "New German Confederation" becomes moot within the EU.

I hope these answer your questions. Thank you. -- NuclearVacuum 22:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

OK, thank you for explanation

I think that bigger German state in cold war is better as buffer against Warsav Pact that three smaller states, but it is only my opinion and argument with NATO and EU is logical.

No worries. I agree 100% that a unified state would be better than smaller ones. But speaking from an alternate history standpoint, a divided Germany is still something interesting to explore. On a side note, I believe Lower Saxony would find themselves in a similar position to OTL's Germany (politically, economically, etc.). Not 100%, but close enough. -- NuclearVacuum 00:56, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Situation with Croatia is aproximately similar that in Catalonia after referendum in OLT. Maybe there exist Croatian separatistic teroristic group like ETA or IRA.

More likely name of Czechoslovakia is Czech and Slovak Federative Republic or Czecho-Slovakia. And on coat of arms is probably two Czech lions and two Slovakian crosses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_and_Slovak_Federative_Republic

I believe there existed some kind of Croat liberation front (though I can't think of a name). I don't see why such an organization wouldn't exist here.

In regards to Czechoslovakia, it is still a WIP. But I envison it being a centralized state (as opposed to a federation). On par with Yugoslavia ITTL. -- NuclearVacuum 19:32, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

What is divergence point for Czechoslovakia?

Borealia and the Mormons

https://www.deviantart.com/acb3c0/art/Road-Map-of-the-State-of-Deseret-2012-906668074

I found this snippet and thought it could be an inspiration.

Kyuzoaoi (talk) 23:09, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Austria proposal

Hi - I would like to contribute to Russian America, and here is my article proposal: Austria.

Essentially, my plan for an alternate Austria in this timeline is that Austria isn't neutral. That's right, despite the Austrian State Treaty signed in 1955 forcing Austria to be neutral, it is the Cold War and eventually, Austria decides to do the unthinkable and join NATO in 1961, which results in the Soviet Union severing ties with the nation. The United States and the western bloc allow Austria to do this because one more ally can't possibly hurt.

As a result of Austria joining NATO, throughout the 1970s and '80s, Austria builds its military up again, while also further making economic reforms.

That's the basic idea for Austria in RA, and I'll give more detail once I expand my ideas more.

Looking forward to contribute to this timeline ThatAlternateHistoryLad5 (talk) 21:56, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

First and foremost, thank you so much for your interest in this timeline. With that being said, I don't believe this scenario would work out in the way you've written it. From my understanding, here are the biggest issues:

• For Austria to go against the Austrian State Treaty (let alone their Declaration of Neutrality signed the same year) would not only piss off the USSR but also the Western Allies as well. I don't think NATO membership would be guaranteed after such a move (it would, more than likely, be decades later).

• After seeing the Allies partition Germany into smaller nations, I don't think Austria would be interested in "rocking the boat" in such a way.

• It should also be noted that Bavaria would [most likely] be a neutral nation as well. I could see them following in Austria's footsteps (being neutral, that is).

• In 1961, the Goldsboro Incident happens, with a nuclear bomb accidentally going off in North Carlina. I predict this incident would make NATO membership (let alone allowing American weapons on their soil) very unpopular for several years.

Realistically, I just don't see Austria going through this and coming out in a better position than what they already got. The only way I could see Austria joining NATO is if the Austrian State Treaty doesn't happen. At which point, we'd see an East Austria and a West Austria emerge during the Cold War (which would likely be worse off for Austria in the long run).

On a side note, I've also been considering that the 1920 Carinthian plebiscite goes in favor of Yugoslavia in TTL. This could put a damper on Austria guaranteeing the minority rights for the Croats and Slovenes (since they are now in Yugoslavia). -- NuclearVacuum 00:29, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi again. Reading this, I can agree that it sounds kinda unlikely. Although I've taken the West-East division into consideration, and here is a potential new version of a potential Russian America Austria:

In our own timeline, Karl Renner was declared by the Soviets to be Chancellor of Austria during the final weeks of the war when Austria was being liberated from Nazi Germany. The western allies didn't recognise this, but after Renner started making reforms to prevent himself from being influenced by commmunists (since he was a social-democrat), the allies recognised Renner as president.

However, I've considered a way that Austria could've been divided - if a pro-Soviet politician was declared chancellor of Austria instead of Renner. I was thinking Johann Koplenig, who - unlike Renner, who was a Social-Democrat) - was an actual communist. This would've made the allies even more pissed at the Soviets. The allied occupation still goes ahead, but with more tense issues. Because the western allies don't recognise Koplenig as Austrian chancellor (and later president), they set up a pro-Western government lead by Leopold Figl in Innsbruck. This results in a major problem, as Austria is essentially run by two governments.

This eventually can't go on anymore, and a compromise is reached in 1948 - Austria is divided into two countries. The Democratic Republic of Austria (East Austria) and the Republic of Austria (West Austria). Neither countries recognise each other (similar to the East-West Germany situation). This would play out somewhat similarly to East and West Germany, as West Austria would grow to be the more successful brother, while East Austria is forced to the chains of their adoptive father.

Then, when NATO is of the creation, West Austria joins it sometime around 1949-1960, and then builds up its military for the first time since WWI. East Austria is just forced into the Warsaw Pact because the Soviets really just hate the Austrians gosh darnit. Maybe we'd also see something similar to the Berlin Wall (like the Vienna Wall) - idk, that's maybe what we can discuss.

Eventually, after a period of division, in the late 1980s the Soviets do a little something called suppressing independence movements in their own country but allow liberalisation reforms in their puppets. This results in East Austria becoming more liberal and open for reunification negotiations. Eventually, an agreement is made, and in 1990/1991, Austria is officially reunified under the Republic of Austria. Meanwhile the Soviets just die but we don't talk about them.

So that's basically a renewed version of my proposal for Austria in this ATL (with aspects from my own West-East Austria). Feel free to add some constructive criticism or just add on to the idea, I'm open to suggestions, especially since it's your timeline so I can't even avoid it lol. Looking forward to this response (and also keep up the good work with this timeline since I like it a lot and it's a huge inspiration for me) ThatAlternateHistoryLad5 (talk) 06:12, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

I've taken the time to do more reading on the idea. All-in-all, I don't see why this couldn't happen here. From what I've read, it does appear that the Soviets were already set on establishing a communist government in Austria. This even went as far as Stalin himself to personally handpick the future cabinet (no idea who was on it, but still). Ironically, it was Renner that stopped this. He was able to persuade both Stalin and the Soviet troops to let him form a mixed government (the rest is history).

In order for a divided Austria, we'd need to either have Renner out of the picture or (more than likely) the Soviets simply ignore anything he requested. Perhaps the Soviets are more dead set on a communist government in Austria because Germany was going to be divided up (with Moscow wanting more German communist states). Realistically, I could see lots of factors playing into this happening.

After that, it'd basically be a copy and paste of OTL's Germany. A divided Austria and Vienna. A "Vienna Wall." Cold War tensions and eventual reunification in the 1990s. This would completely change Bavaria's history as well (causing them to join NATO ASAP).

I'll post more when I can. -- NuclearVacuum 17:05, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

WIP Map.

Before I forget again, I worked on a rough map for Austria. It isn't an official map, but just something to better understand the situation.

The bigger ideas I've thought of are that:

1. South Tyrol would include East Tyrol, leaving North Tyrol to itself. Alternatively, the north could keep the name Tyrol and the south adopt the name "Bozen" (to keep distinctive names).
2. Upper Austria gains territory from Styria. This is due to the occupation zones but could also be for losing territory to East Austria.

It isn't perfect but it seems appropriate, as the same thing happened to Germany in OTL. I'm also open to Carinthia being awarded more territory (most likely from Styria) since the British also did this in their occupation zone in Germany. Perhaps East Tyrol is given to Carinthia?

I haven't worked out what the modern states of [former] East Austria would look like. Similar to East Germany, I could see East Austria completely redrawing their subdivions, with the modern states adopting these Soviet Era lines instead of readopting the old ones.

I also know you wanted Innsbruck to be the [temporary] capital of West Austria, but I don't think this would be the case. My guess is that the Austrians wouldn't want to designate a major city to be their capital as it may promote permanence. This was partially the reason Bonn was chosen as West Germany's capital. My guess is that it should be located somewhere more central and (very likely) a minor city. Perhaps somewhere close to Salzburg and close to the borders of the American and British zones. I'll name a few once I've done some more reading.

The last bits I'm going to include are not related to the map but are a few [mostly esoteric] things that may change in Austria for this timeline.

The first is that the Zwentendorf Nuclear Power Plant (being located in East Austria) would likely be brought online in TTL. In the 1978 referendum, virtually all of the areas that would be part of East Austria voted in favor of operating the plant (though I doubt the Soviet-backed government would care all that much). While it might cause some controversy following reunification, I could easily see the plant continuing to operate to this day (similar to the Paks Nuclear Power Plant in neighboring Hungary).

The second would be the Glycol Wine Scandal of 1985. While not all of Austria's vineyards are located in East Austria, they would hold the majority. Given the same circumstances would still exist in TTL, I could see something like this potentially happening in East Austria. I could foresee two scenarios happening here. One is that the scandal happens like in OTL. Trade between East Austria with the west wouldn't be all that affected (despite the Iron Curtain) and the scandal happens all the same. In the second scenario (if trade with the west is restricted), I could see trade with the USSR and the east causing a delayed scandal. The communist governments wouldn't investigate and/or cover up the scandal for several years, only for it to be revealed by the 1990s and bringing more stigma to the Austrian wine industry (perhaps even killing it).

Hopefully more to come in the future. -- NuclearVacuum 02:28, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

These are all interesting ideas - honestly I can see your point that Innsbruck wouldn't be the capital of West Austria. As for the redrawing of administrative states in Western Austria, I can help with that - I'll draw a rough sketch later today. As for renaming South Tyrol to "Bozen", I honestly really like that idea - it's a unique idea instead of just keeping it as "South Tyrol". I'm also down for giving East Tyrol to Carinthia.

As for the scandals and nuclear power plant, yeah definitely that's an interesting idea, and I'd love to explore those. ThatAlternateHistoryLad5 (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Can I edit Albania?

I just found out that Albania in this timeline doesn't exist, and as a person from there, I would be really cool if I could edit it TheAvgRedditUser (Talk) 14:13, 4 April, 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your interest in this timeline. By all means, feel free to create a page for Albania. All I ask is that you familiarize yourself with the editorial guidelines for the timeline beforehand.

The only major deviation for Albania in TTL is that the 1997 referendum is successful and Albania is a constitutional monarchy today (a similar movement took place in neighboring Bulgaria, Romania, and Yugoslavia). It's also possible that Crown Prince Leka (before 1997) would reside in Alaska (or else have connections there).

Have fun. -- NuclearVacuum 05:35, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I have begun work on it! TheAvgRedditUser (Talk) 9:30, 4 April, 2023 (UTC)

Just giving you a heads up that you can't be copying and pasting from Wikipedia (even if you are changing a few words around). You need to write out the article yourself. I've removed the plagiarism for now. I've also updated the infobox to follow the other articles of the timeline.

Let me know if you have any questions. -- NuclearVacuum 20:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Netherlands proposal

Hello

I return with another proposal, the Netherlands. Basically, the Kingdom of Holland manages to survive annexation in 1810, and following the failure of the invasion of Russia, Holland rebels and joins the Coalition. Following the end of the war, Louis I gets to keep his throne.

Thoughts? ThatAlternateHistoryLad5 (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to say, but the POD of this timeline is 1812 and beyond. Fort Ross wouldn't have been established until 1812, well after the Netherlands' annexation in 1810. Beyond that, I don't feel comfortable with this idea because of the likely butterflies it would create (Napoleon III being a prime example).

Thank you for the suggestion, but I don't think it's viable for this timeline. I also see you've started articles for the Netherlands and Ireland. You are more than welcome to work on them if you are still interested. -- NuclearVacuum 14:44, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I've been watching your recent edits for Ireland and the Netherlands. I do have several questions and comments related to it, but I was hoping to get a more detailed explanation from you before I give my two cents. Thank you. -- NuclearVacuum 03:36, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I know you've been working on other projects, so please don't take this as me telling you to "step up" or anything like that. I'm simply writing out my critiques and alternatives to your recent proposals. Feel free to get back when you desire it.

For Ireland I see you're interested in them becoming a monarchy. However, I don't see how this could be workable in the long run. From what I've read, the Irish independence movement was primarily a republican one. The suggestions of establishing a monarchy among the Irish founding fathers were either in regards to creating a dual monarchy with Great Britain (something like what Austria-Hungary was) or toying with the idea of getting Prince Joachim of Prussia to accept an Irish thrown. The latter, however, was more of a thought experiment in the event of a German victory in World War I. Unless there's something I'm missing, I just don't see this working. Feel free to add anything if I missed something.

As for the Netherlands, I feel like this scenario would also have too many butterflies that would alter/conflict with the established canon outside the Netherlands. In particular, the canonicity of Indonesia has already been established. You can read more about it here, but the Netherlands are able to hold onto the eastern half of Indonesia and they are made into constituent countries.

There are a bunch of other butterflies this scenario would create, which is why I don't feel comfortable with it given what I can see. But if you're interested in a Dutch Republic existing here, I believe I have a compromise if you're interested. From what I've read, William III's reign was full of scandals and controversies. Perhaps we could see these scandals intensified to the point that the Dutch monarchy is too tarnished for the people to accept.

My suggestion is to have William III double down on marrying Émilie Ambre after the death of Sophie of Württemberg. In OTL, William's family convinces/coerced him to not do this and he marries Emma of Waldeck and Pyrmont instead. For this scenario, let's say he's too far gone to listen and goes ahead with his original decision. This would cause an Edward VIII-like situation and would result in William abdicating the thrown (either willingly or coerced). Because this was 1877, Prince William would take the throne as William IV. He would die two years later, in which his brother Alexander takes over (Alexander I?) until his death in 1884.

Because William III never marries Emma, Wilhelmina would never be born. With no heir outside of a distant [German] one, this could push the republican movement in the Netherlands to success. Either we see a peaceful transition of power (maybe Alexander agrees to abdicate early) or a revolution breaks out (what kind I'm not too sure about). A Republic of the Netherlands is proclaimed sometime in the 1880s.

This scenario shouldn't affect the canonicity of Indonesia (let alone the other constituent countries) too much. The only potential butterflies I could see could involve Belgium and Luxembourg down the line (or nothing happens).

Let me know what you think when you have time. -- NuclearVacuum 02:41, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Okay, so I would like to explain the Irish PoD:

In OTL, two of the main leaders of the Irish independence movement, Éamon de Valera AND Arthur Griffith, advocated for a dual monarchy solution in the beginning, with Ireland being ruled by the British monarch. However, they slowly adopted a republican ideology. In TTL, instead of becoming republicans, they become Irish monarchists advocating for the restoration of an Irish kingdom under a descendent of one of the Middle Ages Irish kings, and slowly they influence other members of the independence movement to support an Irish kingdom, with a small faction advocating for Irish republicanism. The Irish Republic is proclaimed as a provisional government, and they successfully gain full independence in 1922, and in 1925 they offer the Irish throne to Lucius O'Brien, 15th Baron Inchiquin, a descendent of the kings of Thomond. Boom, Irish kingdom. This may sound ASB, but it isn't too unlikely, considering de Valera and Griffith were monarchists, but switched to republicanism, so we can just say they remain supporters of an independent Irish monarchy, viewing it as the "true unifier of Ireland".

As for the Netherlands, I like the idea. Now that I think about it, while a Dutch republic is an interesting idea, the way you've laid out the path for an alternate monarchy list of the Netherlands is epic. Assuming all children are born the same as IOTL, here is the list of monarchs for the Netherlands:

• William III (1849-1878) (Abdicates because of wanting to marry Émilie Ambre)
• William IV (1878-1879) (Doesn't care about ruling, and dies outside of the Netherlands like in OTL)
• Alexander (1879-1884) (Dies like in OTL)
• Sophie (1884-1897) (Aunt of William and Alexander, becomes Queen after their deaths)
• William V (1897-1919) (Grandson of Sophie, abdicates Dutch throne due to fear of being overthrown)
• Charles (1919-1988) (Son of William V, goes under a regency and restores the Dutch monarch's popularity)
• Michael (1988-present) (Son of Charles)

Thoughts? ThatAlternateHistoryLad5 (talk) 06:42, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarifications.

In regards to Ireland, I still don't really see it. As I mentioned before, de Valera [and others] were monarchists early on but changed to republicans later. This pro-monarchy sentiment was aimed at creating something like a dual monarchy (whereby Ireland was to become the "Hungary" of a British "Austria-Hungary") or that Ireland remained a part of the Commonwealth realm (just like Australia and Canada). It was only after the British upped the violence against the Irish did the idea of a continued monarchy die.

I know you're scenario is based on an Irish monarchy being established down the line, but I believe that once a republic is established it would take a lot more to adopt a monarchy. Also, it should be noted that the Irish Free State (which was the first independent Irish state created in 1922) was a British dominion (like Australia). It wouldn't be until 1937 that de Valera [et al.] were able to adopt measures to remove Ireland's dominion status and only then did it become a republic. I highly doubt the British would allow/support a different monarchy of Ireland. I also doubt the Irish would tolerate a dual monarchy by this point due to the Northern Ireland situation. There's also the issue regarding the Irish Republican Army.

Still an interesting idea, but I don't think it's workable in this timeline. Once Ireland was incorporated into the United Kingdom (1801) the damage was done as far as I can see. From the mind of de Valera, a republic was the best-case scenario for an independent Ireland given the cards the Irish were dealt. (Check this out if you want)

In regards to the Netherlands, I'm glad you like the scenario. However, I personally find it pointless/worthless to simply adopt this new monarchy lineup described. From what I've read, seeing the Dutch monarchy going through this kind of chaos would almost certainly lead to it being abolished in one form or another. A king who caused several crises, followed by his two sons who don't live/reign for more than a few years would be very chaotic.

I'd also like to add that with the end of House of Orange-Nassau, this would mean the rise of the House of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach. This on its own could also be very chaotic/problematic as Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach was a constituent state of the German Empire and therefore we'd likely see a personal union between the Netherlands and a German constituent state. I don't know if either the Netherlands, Germany, or Europe at large would allow this.

Hope this helps. -- NuclearVacuum 04:29, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Lack of a European Union [For Now]

Current Thinking.

I originally wrote this after cleaning up the article for Austria, but I feel I should be transparent about this moving forward.

I've been [temporarily] removing any mention of the European Union and the Eurozone from the timeline (such as in infoboxes). This is because I recently read somewhere that without a united West Germany, the frameworks for the EU wouldn't exist (at least not to the scale of OTL).

Instead, Europe would be divided into several spheres of influence. I've included a map, but for more details:

• The British would hold influence over Westphalia and Scandinavia (even neutral Finland and Sweden). Given this bloc's hesitation to fully integrate into Europe (see Brexit), this bloc would be independent of continental affairs. Ireland (not being a part of NATO) would either be in this block (if barely) or move closer to France.

• The French would hold influence over [basically] the original founders of the EU (but with the inclusion of Austria). Switzerland would be neutral but still close (like OTL). With the collapse of communist Spain, Catalonia and the Basque Republic would join this bloc and NATO. It's possible that this bloc could form a rump EU with similar trappings (eurozone, free trade, EEC, etc.), but I'm not fully sure.

• The Portuguese Commonwealth (a federation of Portugal and its overseas colonies) would be in NATO but politically/economically cut off from Europe (in no small part due to Spain being communist). For all intents and purposes, Portugal could be viewed as the "Russia of the West" (physically in Europe but completely its own thing). Galicia would effectively become a Portuguese puppet state and would likely join NATO by today. I could only describe [rump] Spain as being the "Serbia of the West" (they want to join but are kinda still stuck in the past). Spanish emigration would be bigger (likely setting in Portuguese Africa or the Americas).

• Russia would be [politically] closer with Alaska. For all intents and purposes, Alaskan influence has caused the "Russian bear to fall asleep" (or the current government in Moscow doesn't worry about what Eastern Europe is doing). Ukraine would be in the beneficial position of having close ties with both Russia and Alaska while not having to look over their shoulders for the Russians.

• The Balkans would be stable but have economic and demographic problems. Many emigres are leaving for Alaska (since there is no EU for them to freely move in). For all intents and purposes, the Balkans are dying and are at a crossroads of other spheres of influence. Basically the same as OTL, but without a strong EU to back them up.

• The Visegrád Group, Prussia, and the Baltic States would move in a similar position to OTL. They are most likely to join NATO by today and economically are doing well. Politically may be moving further right (like Poland and Hungary). Very much still Russophobic and having strong ties with the United States (and potentially Alaska). The Baltic States are more likely to fall into the British bloc (due to Scandinavia), with the remainder more likely being their own bloc.

This is all WIP. Suggestions are always welcome. Hope this answers any questions that may arise. -- NuclearVacuum 03:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

About Eritrea in Russian America

https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/comments/14mdxn7/the_russian_rhodesia_kalmiriyan_republic_part_of/ I saw something we can borrow for Eritrea in Russia but in a more realistic setting.

Mitchell WerBell III could be an interesting leader of Eritrea, making it a gun-for-hire country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_WerBell_III

What do you think?

Kyuzoaoi (talk) 23:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Awesome find. Thank you.

In regards to WerBell, I'm unfortunately unable to find anything regarding his ancestry. Meaning I can't confirm if he actually is Russian or if this was just something he made up. If I can confirm this, I could easily see him being a military leader and a recognizable face for Eritrea. -- NuclearVacuum 21:06, 1 July 2023 (UTC)