Talk: WCRB (1983: Doomsday)

Revision & Refreshment[]

I finally started to refresh the WCRB page. Its an actualization rather then reinvention as I try to approach 1983>DD anew... as I am reading through countries and discussions I will adjust the WCRB page to the new canon additions and actual situation (also LoN)

if now one objects I hereby want to readopt this page

any comments, critics etc. warmly welcomed !

Xi'Reney 09:40, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

This is a page that should really belong to the community, not any one user. Don't really see much need, myself, to adjust the page, either. Lordganon 10:22, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

I, for one, see a need here. I welcome an adjusting of the WCRB to reflect its late role in accessing the world situation. As an organization it has a big job and no doubt far fewer resources than needed for the job. We editors have been 'working around' what the early reports presented as the world as seen from the eyes of the WCRB. Most often the editors, myself included, have not used the viewpoint of observers anyway. More often than not, the articles are written from the viewpoint of participants, bringing in details undecernable by any international news and fact-finding organization.

It makes more sense to adjust the WCRB and LoN to what has been passed as canon than to nit-pick every article to reflect the narrow viewpoint of those organizations. Perhaps the articles can be seen more as contributions to an international encyclopedia being compiled by the WCRB. That way, the WCRB can operate far more efficiently and gather information more quickly. SouthWriter 13:34, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Either way, it is a page that should be in the hands of the community, not one user. Lordganon 05:29, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, the WCRB is just an organization of reporters spread around the world. Every regular contributor is either an agent of the WCRB or 'reports to' an agent. It is a tool used by this time line to make the wiki seem realistic. Most editors have disregarded the original concept of the organization, it seems, failing to take into account the point of view of an outsider in most cases. I know I am guilty of this. It seems that Xi'Reney is just trying to make the article more accurate by changing it to reflect what has developed apart from any realization that it is even there. As such he should not be hindered by endless arguments. I am all for him making the concept more viable. SouthWriter 13:55, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

And who is arguing? >.>; All I really said was that he shouldn't be able to adopt a community page. I've no problem with him "updating" it, though as stated I don't think it to be necessary. Lordganon 16:11, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

WCRB Graphics Idea !! --- LOGO/// Divisional EMBLEMS[]

Hey all, after some time I finally have an idea for a WCRB LOGO//and even Divisional Emblems. As I had a Friday night with nothing to do I spend some time on this. Please read the explanation below and let me know what you think. This is an overview containing a basic scheme idea and some colourful examples.

Detailed explanation:

As the recent transition of the WCRB being a LoN agency I thought beginning there and keeping a connection.

The basic scheme used is the old real historical League of Nations pentagon/5-ended-star semi-official logo. I then inserted our LoN Logo (see description in the article) modified on the background of the portugal flag astrolabium symbolizing the glorious Rediscovery missions. Adjacent to the pentagon is a small rectangle to allow space for the diverse WCRB Command/Division Description.

Use/variation: My proposal would be to use the basic symbolic scheme mandatory for all commands/divisions of WCRB. The colouring could be adjusted to the free imagination of every command/user itself (purple?, all white?). Further ideas could be slightly different symbols for functional differences for the special branches... Cartographical Dept., Historical Institute etc.

I think similar to the flags on the front page we could insert miniature versions of the emblems to the porta page :) see the example there:)

This might be even a emblem to be used on uniforms etc :) I could uploaded all single files if you like. Made this with inkscape :)... but not sure if the .svg format would be ideal... any suggestions? Because I am having problems when uploading... I loose some details as you can see ...:( any ideas??

So...What do you think? --Xi'Reney 20:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Fantastic, if you ask me! Perfect for flags, uniforms, stationery, ship hulls... When I imagine them on uniforms they make me think of Star Trek for some reason. I'll bet there are movies and TV shows *there* all about fictional voyages of the WCRB into unknown lands. Benkarnell 22:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Ben! Start Trek... hmmm true...the United Federation of Planets Logo (from our friends at wiki, Mery Alpha) looks amazingly similar...Roddenberry was very creative in building this...using the good 1946 United nations logo...:)

WCRB movies?? hmmm. interesting point:) space for exploration :)

Xi'Reney 22:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I think Reclamation should be flipped around 180" -- even though that makes it run "upside down and backwards" it took me half a second to understand what was going on with the designs.

I favor the white and drab, although I like the one at the bottom, as well, and think that could be used for headquarters and dress uniform. I think the topmost one should be "mission-wear".

I think that we should have Marc Pasquin give us some "rankings" for this, too. It would be fun to have these on our user pages! Louisiannan 15:08, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

WCRB LOGO Competition !![]

Folks we need a WCRB Logo !!! As i got no access to www except few hostel pcs her in NZL i invite everyone to propose any ideas for a WCRB Logo, Flag !!! Sth near to the League of nations Logo, UN ... id dont kknow !!! THX for all ideas --Xi'Reney 04:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I made this one awfully fast, based on the suggested orange flag of Antarctica. The idea of hands lifting up the globe suggests rebirth and cooperation. I don't think it should be used - it's a bit sloppy - but maybe it's a start. Benkarnell 15:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Application for membership[]

How does one join the WCRB? --Louisiannan 22:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

So far: write a page on something. If you have any ideas, I can't wait to read them. Benkarnell

Oh -- I've offered suggestions. That's about where I am just yet. Especially regarding the "New US."--Louisiannan 22:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

So we can just add our names to the WCRB list if we've been contributing? DarthEinstein 17:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I wish everyone would do that! It would make things much easier:) Benkarnell 18:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

As established a WCRB identity "will be awarded to regular contributors"... not sure what i meant with that in the first place :) but i think a lot of suggestions and some constructive contributions should be already enough for the WCTB remember this is an organization trying to spread and cover as many regions in the world as possible. Just take care not to contradict already existing commands, identities. So feel free to be to creative to invent your identity. --Xi'Reney 21:28, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Logo WCRB, Medifleet[]

Hi Xi'Reney! Great new logo, could you create a smaller one of the light blue say for the medical wing Mjdoch

Eastern North America command[]

Xi'Reney, is it okay if I establish a WCRB Eastern North America command and to establish LoN aid and peacekeeping efforts in the southern U.S.? And, perhaps establishing cooperation and support by non-member nations (i.e. Virginia, Kentucky, others) for LoN efforts and goals as a prerequisite for League membership?--BrianD 20:21, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

You don't need to request it, so just go ahead and add yourself. I wish more people would - this is a tradition that we've kind of let die. Benkarnell

Yes, this is fine, but could you call it something other than Eastern North America Command? Because it seems that the region you are talking about is really just the former southeastern US and north to approximately Virginia, not all of eastern North America. --DarthEinstein 20:38, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

How about the Southern North America Command?--BrianD 20:56, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Maybe, but number 1, it sounds weird, and number 2, it doesn't include Mexico, Central America, etc so Southern North America is a bit of a misnomer. Perhaps the "Former US South Command"? Or maybe name it after whatever city or former state it is based in, but I'm not sure about that. Or the "Dixie Command"... if that's appropriate. In the end it's up to you I suppose. --DarthEinstein 21:01, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Southern United States Command, then. I might suggest that the director be accountable to the North American Command. This initially will be led by an American-Mexican, with Mexican, Caribbean, Cuban and Brazilian peacekeepers (as needed), and that this also will act as a liasion between prospective member nations and the LoN.--BrianD 21:07, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the WCRB, Brian. Good to see some new faces. Southern United Stated Command...or SUSAC as you established...intriguing regarding the exist-the-US-discussion but okey !--Xi'Reney 23:15, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Xi'Reney! I have to think that as long as there is a government calling itself the provisional USA in existence, and given that some areas aren't aware of what happened with the APA post DD, the discussion would be ongoing in some corners of the world even now. --BrianD 23:23, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

So, Brian, if you are the commander of the whole Southern US, is there a "place" for me at WCRB? Right now I think I am going to be fine with just developing the Piedmont and the rogue states nearby. I see reclaiming the state of South Carolina south of here as the next thing on the agenda working toward the present. But I was wondering -- if Piedmont explorers are heading down river discovering pockets of survivors, do they have to "miss" Florence and Georgetown since the WCRB explorers found them apparently unaware of civilization a hundred or so miles away? SouthWriter 16:22, February 6, 2010 (UTC)

That thing is more of a shoutout to the editors here than anything official, South; it has as much real meaning as my proclaiming myself the captain of the USS Enterprise-G :-) You know when I wrote that thing that I did so in part to leave room for others to write in their own scenarios. Assuming Piedmont made it that far, it's probable they ran into Georgetown but possible that, since the Florence community is so small, they really did miss one another there. But you are not bound to any of that in the least. BrianD 17:51, February 6, 2010 (UTC)

The 2004 "Census"[]

I was wondering by what means was the WCRB able to come to the following "conclusions"

Their findings:

Total World Population: a 800 million. Slightly more than estimates for the year 1750 AD. Primarily in the Southern Hemisphere.
Chief causes of death: communicable disease, cancer, and starvation.
Infant mortality rates: about 40% or 2 of 5 die before reaching the age of one year. 60% or 3 of 5 die before reaching age five.
Average life-span: 32 years.
Literacy rates of those under 20 years of age: 2% (outside of the ANZ, Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Celtic Alliance).

The estimation of the population, with an assumed death rate in the northern hemisphere of perhaps 80% would perhaps be right. The causes of death also make sense, though for an assumed annilation of most of the North Hemisphere, I'd think "violence" would be the top cause of death. I don't know how the figured the infant mortality rates, but assuming that a nuked society can't do better than 50% in keeping babies alive sounds unrealistic. The "literacy rate of those under 20" at 2% assumes far too much on the part of the "fact finders." This would assume that hardly anyone who had children in twenty years after doomsday ever taught them anything. How could this be? Survivors would be literate, so why would their children not at least learn to read? I don't think these teams had the means to make such a determination.

And another thing, is this supposed to be a census of the whole world, or just of the parts that were bombed? If we assume that the 800 million are "primarily in the southern hemisphere, how does the average life-span go from 70 to 32 years? Is the "average life-span" taking in the assumption that a child is more than likely NOT going to live to adulthood (see infant mortality rates), and thus those who do live an expected 70 years are averaged down by a the same number that don't make it past 10? And is this for the whole planet, or just for those nuked areas in question? Same for the Infant Mortality rates -- are the babies dying in the south due to UV? I don't think the adults would allow such a thing to happen in the civilized south. SouthWriter 05:38, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the consensus on the population number is that its ridiculous. Especially considering the SAC population is about 300 million. With Africa and India totaling something like 1.6 billion people that means over a billion people in those two areas alone died without being hit by nukes.Oerwinde 05:49, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

The numbers are from XR, and no, we haven't really followed them. But they do represent some of the oldest material written for the project, so we need to be careful in how we approach them. Life expectancy always includes infant deaths, and so in a culture with a high infant death rate it always looks deceptively low. (So the joke about medieval people having a mid-life crisis at the age of 20 doesn't hold up.) Benkarnell 05:54, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

I have to correct you Ben, these numbers are not from me, they are from the original "founder emeritus". So they outdate evn everyhting I wrote...

I just did never change them because of not wanting to "toy around" with those numbers...I was not able to think too long about "Are 1, 2 or 3 BILLION people dead?" Taking this responsibility I was not ready for back then I wanted to write about the world "today" not about the tremendous death, sorrow, and disaster in 1983.

And for a just "rational", more scientifical discussion I did not have enough knowledge about this...Xi'Reney 12:25, February 6, 2010 (UTC)

Commands[]

Hi I have the command of the Caucasus (because i created almost all the articles of there) but i want also the one of my home country, Venezuela (and I done most of the article) , might I have also the Venezuelan one? VENEZUELA 22:24, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

Generally the commands for users are located in their flagship article. If you wrote the Venezuela article I don't see why not.Oerwinde 22:29, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

All you have to do is add the WCRB Caucaus Command and promote yourself.

Yankovic270 22:32, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

I already add the one of the Caucasus might I add the one of Venezuela? VENEZUELA 22:35, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can tell each user can have only one command.

Yankovic270 22:46, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

Might I pass all the part of the History of Venezuela to his own article without adding the Proposal Template? VENEZUELA 22:51, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

I've seen one person have more then one command so I don't see any harm in you having command over Venezuela & the Caucasus region. --GOPZACK 22:55, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

like who? VENEZUELA 22:57, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

I don't want to be a jerk but I have deleted his command post on Georgia. As the primary caretaker of Georgia, I kicked Venezuela out of the article a few weeks ago. Besides, one person with two command posts is impossible, Vene. Can you really be in Venezuela and Georgia at the same time in the 1983DD World? Arstarpool 01:57, July 28, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry but how exactly do you kick someone off an article on a community project? No one owns an article, that is why we have caretakers. They act as the front man but they certainly don't have a power to stop someone from making good faith edits to an article. If you have a dispute with Ven then bring it up to the community, but just kicking him out is impossible. Mitro 15:45, July 30, 2010 (UTC)

Can I add a WCRB command for Central Asia? Fedelede 01:54, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

Go for it. What everyone seems to forget is that all you need to do to "promote" yourself is add the command to the list. Yankovic270 02:52, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

Yank's right, this is very informal. Knock your socks off. Mitro 15:21, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

WCRB England Expeditionary Division, Manchester - Owen1983?[]

If Owen wants a command that's all fine and good but why in the name of Sam Hill is it based in Manchester? It's nuked! --GOPZACK 04:01, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

Because it's Owen. Fegaxeyl 09:40, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

Do you think Owen is ever going to get it into his head that Manchester got nuked...... TWICE! and that it is currently a highly radioactive wasteland or do you think he'll just keep his little obsession going?--Smoggy80 11:18, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to remove the title. Owen needs a more realistic position for himself. Mitro 13:59, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

hi guy and gals it would be pointless to have anything based out of Manchester becuse as smoggy80 put it its a wasteland I need a more realistic position--Owen1983 14:13, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

ANZS Commonwealth[]

This page says the ANZS Commonwealth is the former USS Nimitz, while its page says it is the former USS Carl Vinson. I'm not sure which one is right but it should probably be fixed. Mscoree (talk) 13:22, January 8, 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Mscoree. It is the USS Carl Vinson. See the talk pages. You are welcome to make the change. This one was obviously missed in the overall editing. SouthWriter (talk) 22:11, January 8, 2014 (UTC)

Huh. Odd that we missed that one, considering we hutned around for a while for references. Meh.

Fixed it, and removed the insane findings, too.

Lordganon (talk) 11:02, January 9, 2014 (UTC)

Dissolving[]

Would this end up being dissolved once contact is made with all survivor states in the world? Obviously it wouldn't be for a while still, but... Daeseunglim (talk)

Has more goals/missions than that, so no. Lordganon (talk) 11:01, May 13, 2015 (UTC)

Proposed update to WCRB flag[]

Hi all, as with my proposed update to the LoN flag, here is my equivalent Update to WCRBTrainor90 (talk) 04:48, 19 July 2021 (UTC)