Although I appreciate your suggestion, I would politely request that you do not do any work on my article. Although I have not had a chance to work on it lately, I would prefer that you do not change or add on to it since I am the author and have a direction in which I wish to take it. If you have a suggestion, please let me know. Thank you. --Fxgentleman 03:48, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your precious time, good day sir. Arstarpool 04:05, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

You are most welcome sir and I wish you well on your own articles.--Fxgentleman 04:11, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

just to keep you up to date i've been given permission to start doing a bit of work on the Egypt page i've added that Israel launched a couple tactical nukes into the Sinai to stop the Egpytian invasion (in addition to the one that they used on Cairo) hope thats ok?--Smoggy80 16:58, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, that would conflict with what I have been working on. Would you be willing to get together and discuss the matter with me via Skype. That way we could share our thoughts in real time so I can explain where I am going on Israel. Please let me know if you would be interested in doing this. I am available today if you can talk and am on east coast time. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 18:23, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

Dont have Skype sorry plus i'm on the East coast of the UK so some time difference, i'll remove the tactical nuke bit.--Smoggy80 16:15, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry we are in such different time zones, I normally like having discussions with folks in real time rather than through here. I do have some serious concerns about the article dating back before you started work. I have been meaning to bring them to the table for sometime given the impact they have on my Israel article but have not had a chance. I am going to post them this evening when I get home from work. What kind of lattitude has Louis given you regarding the article? After I lay out my concerns, I would appreciate your imput on the subject. Perhaps we could reach a compromise. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 16:55, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Delmarvan Virginia

The Virginian Republic is expanding its territory to the east, and soon they will have a border with the Delmarvan territories in Virginia. I warn you that despite their efforts to help the other nations in the region, they are still the jingoistic nation they have always been. Unlike the pacifist Lincolnites, when the Virginians want something they take it. They aren't the type to mess around with. The whole situation with Delmarva having Virginian territory gives me a headache. Yankovic270 18:25, June 16, 2010 (UTC)

Yank, given we have been down this path before you know my feelings when you approach me in this manner. I understand your are in your "role playing mode", however, I don't go in that direction nor do I appreciate being addressed like this. Rather than periodically making threats against me and the UCD or refusing to acknowledge what I have already written, why don't you try to logically approach a solution rather than behave this way? See if using Hopewell as a port is feasible. Have you ever considered the possibility of a treaty between the VR and UCD? Perhaps in exchange for say coal, maybe the UCD could allow goods to pass through one of their ports for VR? Please keep in mind as well I have every intention of returning to the UCD and picking up where I left off. --Fxgentleman 20:36, June 16, 2010 (UTC)


Would it be ok if I helped you on the UCD articles? I too am a resident of Northern VA, and I know a lot about the area. This would be my first Doomsdat article, but I think I'm up to the task. BoredMatt 20:53, June 16, 2010 (UTC)


Seeing the last edit from you on the article was exactly 3 months ago, may I adopt it? Arstarpool 15:39, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

Hi Arstarpool. In regards to your request to adopt my Delmarva article, I must once again respectfully decline. That said, I wish to take a moment and explain why I am doing so. I gathered from our interaction last month that you were offended for some reason when I turned down your request to work on another of my articles. I realize you are looking for ways by which you can artistically contribute to the Doomsday Timeline and given the storyline is not as wide open (i.e. gray areas to fill in) as it was ten months ago when I joined, creates a problem for newer writers such as yourself looking for a place to work. Just as I am sure you take pride in your work thus far, I feel the same towards my articles. I have and continue to invest a tremendous amount of time researching, plotting, and writing each of my articles so they make sense and are grounded in reality. Since I do this work in my free time outside the demands of my job and other things, I rotate my attention amongst my articles to assure they can receive my full attention. As such, I am aware that some months might pass before I can return to a particular article. However, this does not mean I have abandoned any of my work. Since I have reached a point where I have created the articles I wanted, with one exception, my intention is to spend time working on what I have already created for the foreseeable future. Understandably, given this investment of time and energy, I am disinclined to allow others to adopt or work on my articles since this would take them in directions away from what I have already mapped out and invalidate the research and work I have accomplished thus far. I encourage you as one writer to another to spend more time researching and working on the articles you have already adopted or created and flesh them out more fully. I have read your work and you have laid some decent groundwork to build upon in the areas you have chosen. I hope this explanation helps and I wish you the best on your work and look forward to seeing what what you do with your articles.--Fxgentleman 06:04, June 19, 2010 (UTC)


Hi, I write you because I have an idea: Why don't you do a alawite state in former Syria and a druze state in Former Syria, Thank You please answer me. VENEZUELA 00:46, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Middle East

I randomly decided to remember this 2 months later, but you said you would like to discuss my Sultanate of Turkey article in relation to the rest of your Middle East articles?

You are correct. Sorry about the delay in getting back to you since we last talked about your article. I have been running behind on a number of things as of late. However, I finally had a chance to read your article on Turkey last week and make some notes. I am actually in the process of preparing my thoughts to post to your article's discussion page. If all goes well, I hope to post either before or during the July 4 holiday weekend.--Fxgentleman 17:09, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Great. I look forward to your review. Caeruleus 04:35, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

I added some of the edits you requested. The timeline for development has been extended, more nuclear strikes were added, and another nation in Hatay province has been created. Check it out. Hope you like it.

Also, since most of the Middle East articles are now done, how bout we begin making things interesting and elaborating more on Middle East politics and alliances? I was thinking they could be based on OTL geopolitics, since the reasons for those allignments would be the same ATL. I was thinking about elaborating more on the Israel-Jordan connection and how they interact with an Egypt that's basically a Greece client state. Also, how Turkey, the GSU, and the new Syrian state would fit into these issues. Caeruleus 16:57, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


Can you link to the page? I can't even remember what the SNU is. :D Benkarnell 22:22, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

California and Sierra Nevada

You have yet another border problem. California has been canon for about two months, and will stay that way. Drop the Californian lands. Why don't you center it around the center of the state? You will have no border problems and you can get it graduated. Arstarpool 19:42, July 20, 2010 (UTC)

I know this is not private, but at least in is not "wide open" like the main page. I want to commend you for your civility. Alex (Arstarpool) is a mere teenager, and I am not sure what Yank's excuse is. :-)

Anyway, there is no "rule" that canonization automatically trumps a proposal. The RULE is QSS (Lat. = "What's Written is Written) and QAA ("What's Assumed is Assumed). Your article was written first, and the CR article intruded on that. This was pointed out, and dealt with - somewhat - with impeccable logic. Part of the Assumptions to be assumed is Plausibility -- that is logical consequences to conditions. You are on good stead.

Since you have Zack, a Lieutenant, as mediator, and are contacting the higher ups - the Brass (with whom you worked in formulating the article to begin with) - you have little to fear from the two "constables" whose job should be to clean up spam and vandalism.

If this catches you still awake, have a good night. More than likely, though, you turned off the computer about an hour ago, so here's wishing you a grand day! SouthWriter 05:48, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

I wish to solve this thing one-on-one. As for South, why is it that you parade my semi-personal information on the site? And last time I checked Yank is a teenager too, according to the Honorary Citizens page.
Please comment on the heading below, and only you, Fx. Arstarpool 07:07, July 21, 2010 (UTC)
Good observation about Yank (aka Dustin McVicar), I had not caught that. Having two teenagers as the sole "constables" of this whole wiki may have been a mistake on the Brass's part. The teenage mind IS still developing both intellectually and emotionally, and that explains Yank's past tirades as well. If the truth be known, many of the other editors of these pages are probably also teenagers. My son is 25, and I have watched his maturity grow ever since he was graduated from High School. He has still to outgrow some of the teenage ways, but some sources say that his brain physiology will continue to change until he is 30 (the age of my other son). I speak from experience, Kevin. --SouthWriter 15:31, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in as I am not a contributer, but as I have already been monitoring the situation between Victoria and Astoria, and looking at possible repurcussions from other local groups, I've seen the issue between the two nations and more importantly the users behind them. I have review this issue and hopefully an outsider opinion may be of some service.

Regarding Fxgentleman and the SNU, While I do not wish to criticize the amount of work you have applied to this nation the shear size is a bit questionable and even if the state had survived as well as it did. Even in that situation it's standing as a nation would be beset by the removal of the Las Vegas area and the shear amount of open area that would need to be maintained.

Regarding Arstarpool and the CR, First off, You enacted a loophole made available to you by your position, and are now attempting to use that as the basis for position your creation over one submitted beforehand. Simply put, it's a cheap move and one that quite frankly undercuts your position and argument. However putting that aside the following arguments should be made:

  • Migration and land ownership. Should Nevada have taken the minor amount of damage on Doomsday compared to the considerable damage expected in California, It is more than likely that people in the border regions would head east towards areas that are would be better suited for surviving the initial fallout, and lending their future support to those who helped them. In addition the mountains provide a natural barrier between these nations and one within the confines of this argument that is a lot more practical than a former state line that not only would be harder to patrol and maintain but would require a wasteful amount of manpower that could be put to better usage.
  • Growing conditions. you have questioned the ability of the SNU to grow enough crops and stated your abundance available from California. Please consider that not only has that nation placed within it's borders half of the Owens Valley (which provides a third of the water reserves for the Metro LA district, and could provide for a lot of crops for the SNU) That would have been a tactical mistake you failed to grab but also by not including Sutter County (for Yuba City) the main provider of many of California's crops (Sunsweet while primarily growers of fruit, employ and control over 50% of California (real life) crops)

I could continue but I don't want to cause more issues, suffice to say, I think both proposals are good ones, and the work on both sides should be commended, but there is no reason that with some concessions (SNU should be scaled down a bit smaller) (CR should give up the lands on the eastern side of the mountains, and possibly look to incorporate more of the Sacramento Valley instead) that both of these nations could be viable for Canon status as long as everyone is willing to be flexible.

California and Sierra Nevada (One on One Conversation)

So, let's end this, shall we? Arstarpool 06:58, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

This is all I want: the currently controlled territories. Rather than you taking up my nation, why don't we just have them having established contact at a certain point? Arstarpool 07:50, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Please do not "suspend dialogue with me" because you do not want to hear more arguments. We need to get this done. I will not give you additude, just let's get this show on the road.

Here is my idea for the map. I cut out larger portions of Nevada because in a post-Doomsday world, it is more difficult to control lands and thus the brunt of territory would be centered around the capital. Plus, it will get you out of the border dispute with Utah:

I think this is a very fair map. Let's just go with this, and both of our articles may become canon. Arstarpool 20:02, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Delmarva and Pennsylvania

I know we are currently at war over the SNU border but can I bring another matter up with you? Recently I have made a page on a survivor nation in Pennsylvania, and I wanted to know whether or not it can have relations with Delmarva. Arstarpool 18:00, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

Irregardless of our current dispute, I have no issue with discussing other subjects with you as long as it remains cordial. That aside, I can't forsee any issues at this time regarding relations or trade between the two regions. However, I did not know their was an article on PA, so I will need to read it first before I can give you an answer. Since I will be in and out over the weekend, I will try to post my response and any other thoughts/suggestions I may have to your article's discussion page before Monday.--Fxgentleman 22:46, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

Graduation for the SNU

Hey FX it looks like the SNU will finally be graduated! For your hard work and for putting up with all kinds of unnecessary road blocks, I leave you the honor to gradate the article. Feel free to do that anytime. --GOPZACK 18:58, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Embarrassed to admit, how exactly do I do this? Thanks.--Fxgentleman 03:07, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Just remove that wretched ddprop template from the article. I'll handle all the other "paperwork". --GOPZACK 03:18, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the template per your instructions.--Fxgentleman 04:34, August 16, 2010 (UTC)


I was told you had claimed the future Iraq article. Since there's no article written for it yet, do you mind if I write it? Also, I'd like to know your ideas on where to take Iraq. Caeruleus 00:12, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Also about Iraq I was thinking maybe Baghdad city state, Sunni state, Shia state. VENEZUELA 00:17, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

I truly doubt if Iraq would Balkanize. The area is "ancient Babylon" and has fought wars over its border with Iran. It would take an international peace keeping force in Iraq to keep the Sunnites and Shiites apart! I don't think they would settle for separate areas. --SouthWriter 01:32, August 18, 2010 (UTC) need to lay off the booze lol. The Sunni and Shia in Iraq hate each other. Why do you think they kept fighting each other after the Americans invaded Iraq? Also, modern Iraq doesn't have any popular connection to ancient Babylon. That was mostly Saddam Hussein and his ego. Caeruleus 03:13, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Didn't Joe Biden want to Balkanize Iraq a few years ago? There could be a Kurdish state in the north but I'm not too familiar with Post DD Iraq. --GOPZACK 01:35, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

You're right, Zack. A Kurdish state might work, but that is not quite the same thing as building little city-states. The Kurds, in OTL, have been consistent friends of the US. This is largely because that is where a large Christian community lives. I think the Kurds represent a conquered people not historically linked tightly to the Iraqis. SouthWriter 01:45, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
There already is a Kurdistan that is part of canon fyi, so that's not disputed atm. Caeruleus 03:13, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, a lot of my time and energy was diverted by the problems regarding the SNU. However, I have been ruminating over the situation for a while as where to go. What I would like to do, is to jointly work together on the article, given it impacts Turkey, Iran, and my areas. I would also be interested in doing the same for Kurdistan. Give me some time to get my thoughts together and perhaps we can begin discussing it after I get back from vacation. Most of my stuff is at home and I don't have access to it, plus I will have a lot of work to catch up on when I return home. As such, I would not be able to begin intense discussions until the end of this month. When we begin discussions, we might want to include Vlad since he wrote Iran. Let me know what you think of my proposal. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 02:59, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. Let me know when you get back. I'll go ahead and set up the article now so we can finish it up quickly. Caeruleus 03:13, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

So long as Caer is involved, canon is an issue. While he does not directly go against it, he keeps trying to go against its nature. Look at his "options" on the Iraq talk page for more.

The thing is, while you guys plan on rewriting the canon from Iran to be from an Iraqi viewpoint, the stuff that is canon should likely have stayed.

Lordganon 14:06, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Seriously? You get wrapped up in the most irrelevant issues. Stuff was copied from the Iran page. We want to write something ourselves that focuses on Iraq, not Iran, and is more detailed. Fx also explained this. Move on already. Caeruleus 14:19, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

So that you know, I've now adopted the Kurdistan article, so we are free to go where we with with the Iraq article and where you want to go with your Syria articles. Caeruleus 23:26, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

We need to talk again so we can get the Iraq article finished. Also, I have some ideas about the Middle East to discuss with you. I'll be on Skype all week. Caeruleus 22:21, November 22, 2010 (UTC)

Repairing Relations Between Each Other

I would like to bury the hatchet with you Fx. Considering the rude treatment I have recieved from my so-called "ally" Arstarpool, I would respectively extend this offer of peace. I would really like to work together of an article some day soon. On the subject of my past tirades, I confess to having a case of a type of Autism called Asperger Syndrome. So I have Jekyll-and-Hyde periods where I rant, and afterwards I feel really childish about it. So when I have one of these tirades, please understand. I have a mental disability that often makes it difficult to control my temper.

Yankovic270 03:02, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

I hope I don't end up regretting that confession.

Yankovic270 03:11, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry about our dispute, Yank. Why didn't you tell us earlier? I have a cousin with Aspergers so I know how to deal with it, and if you would have said that earlier I would have been sure to not be such a prick.

To Fx, I am also sorry. I truely am. It's really my fault for holding onto the lands of SNU until the very end and taking the world to hell with me, and it damaged my reputation badly. So I am sorry to both of you. Arstarpool 03:43, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe because I was afraid that it would be recieved negatively and I would be treated like some mentally retarded child. I know what an unpleasant place online forums can be to any one who is even slightly different. I didn't mention it for the same resons I don't mention it in real life. I feel severely self-conscious and ashamed about it.

Yankovic270 03:55, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Yank, I have to admit that your confession caught me off guard. I am learning to deal with my two young grandsons, one with cofirmed "high functional" autism and the other showing signs but not diagnosed yet. Having read up on autism, I am somewhat aware of Asperger's, but not as to its symptoms. From what I've read, though, those suffering from Asperger's are likely to be very intelligent, though antisocical at times. Knowing this, it helps to understand "where you're coming from." I will take both sides of your personality into account as I evaluate your articles. Keep up the good work. SouthWriter 15:25, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinking about adding a TV show called "Virginian Idol" to my Virginia article. I was wondering, do you have musical talent (or know somebody who does)? I have decided to, as a way of putting our disagreements aside, to make you the current Virginian Idol. That is, if you actually survive Doomsday.

Yankovic270 20:11, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Gentlemen, let me begin by saying I appreciate the fact you both have stepped forward to apologize to me concerning the bad behavior you recently displayed towards me. I am aware you do not know me very well, but I am by nature a very easy going individual, a sort of "can't we all get along" type of person. I was raised to respect others and treat them with decency, using the old adage of treating others the way you wish to be treated. Even though I don't consider myself a paragon of virtue, I have done my best to apply this philosophy in my personal and work life, especially when dealing with others via the internet. I would not be honest if I did not say I was extremely offended by the comments directed towards me regarding my SNU article, and to a lesser extent my article for Delmarva. In my world, and perhaps it is my age talking since I am in my 40s, you just don't behave like this. However, I am willing to bury the hatchet in regards to these incidents and give you both a "clean slate" as it was with the following caveats.

Yank, if you are being truthful concerning your condition, you have my deepest sympathies. None the less, you have to stop harassing me over Delmarva. The UCD will not be a member of the Dixie Alliance, since I plan to have it join the ADC. Lastly, accept once and for all that Richmond was destroyed and it has been canon since last fall. Yes being a VA native and all I think it would have been nice if it had survived, but it didn't and that should be accepted. I have to agree with others in that the VR trying to rebuild the city as a pseudo new capital makes little sense what so ever and capital would likely be one more centered to the interior of your nation.

What I would suggest to both of you is if you are upset about something, wait to respond and allow your ardor to cool first. Compose your thoughts in a word file first, study them, and see if you can explain your concerns in a manner which is respectful to the other writer before posting them to the site. Be articulate in your wording rather than yelling or throwing insults. This is what I personally do. In that I do not wish to have to through this again with either of you let me state if you have a concern you wish to share with me or a topic to discuss in the future, communicate your thoughts in a calm, respectful, and logical manner towards me and I will do my best to respond as time allows.

Lastly, if I may be allowed to offer some thoughts, I have read many of the articles you both have written and you demonstrate the ability how to effectively write. I have noted though you both seem to be concerned with creating numerous articles rather than expanding on many of those you have created or taken possession. In order for this ATL to be a living breathing history, you need to make your articles more 3D than 2D, giving them breath and depth. Do your research to give yourselves a better understanding on your topic and to ground your writing in reality than fantasy. I have seen evidence of this, so I believe you can do it. When I wrote my SNU article for example, I personally went to the Library of Congress and studied newspapers from the period around 9/25/1983 from Carson City, Reno, and Las Vegas to give me a better idea. Although research can be cumbersome at time, I believe it helps you in the end when creating. Arstarpool, I wanted to say I was sorry to see your article on Erie was unsuccessful. When I presented my research as to why I thought it could work, I was unaware of the PA article. If I had been I would have not have posted my thoughts, so my bad there.

As to the suggestion of working together on a future project (even though Yank is the only one who mentioned it) I am not adverse to the idea. It would depend on the article and if I felt I could truly contribute something. For reasons I have stated previously, I am not looking for any help with any of the articles I created for the foreseeable future. All this said, I hope this marks a turning point for the future in our interactions here. Remember, in the end we are all just doing this for fun.--Fxgentleman 01:01, September 2, 2010 (UTC)


By all means, go ahead. I am just making these for other people to fill them in. Arstarpool 02:34, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Re: 1st contact

Go ahead Fx. My only question is would the Delmervians have the falcilities to deal with an aircraft carrier like Mines Gries?HAD 08:55, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

Delmarva and DC

I left a message regarding Washington DC on the Delmarva talk page. Arstarpool 04:30, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Middle East in Central World

Hi Fx, what do you think of creating the articles of the Middle East countries of Central World, see them in the list o nations. VENEZUELA 16:36, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Although I am deeply appreciative of the offer, I would have to decline at this time. I need to spend more time on my Middle East articles for 1983: Doomsday. Between that and my job I would not have the time to take on another project right now given the research I would have to do before writing anything. Thanks anyway. --Fxgentleman 00:24, September 28, 2010 (UTC)

Delmarva and Jon Stewart (1983: Doomsday)

Hi, recently I was asked to do a couple articles on Stephen Colbert and on Jon Stewart for 1983: Doomsday.

The Colbert article is done and graduated, so I'm going to focus my energies on Stewart, who on DD would have been attending The College of William & Mary in Virginia, which becomes part of Delmarva. I would like to ask for some help, though, as you are the creator of Delmarva, so I do not want to contradict anything you have done, unlike some people. I'm wondering, especially, if it would be plausible that Stewart becomes the President of Delmarva in the future, and has a role in the government, as well as a well-known radio host and writer.

Please let me know, either on my or on Stewart's talk page, and I hope we can work together to create this article, as I'm sure Stewart would easily fill in some roles.

Thanks! Tbguy1992 03:44, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

I wanted to let you know that I had read your suggestion several days ago. However, I have been very busy the last week or so and have had little time to work on the site other than reviewing what has been going on. I will try to post a response in the next couple days in regards to your proposal. I have some thoughts and concerns I wish to discuss. --Fxgentleman 03:22, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

I completely understand, and I eagerly await your reply so we can work together. Tbguy1992 03:49, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

Iraq proposal (1983: Doomsday)

Hello, Fx. I was thinking about creating a state in much of former Iraq and parts of Syria that was run by the small minority of Arameans, that had expulsed much of the Arabic and Persian populace on the regions they controlled. I had the idea of it believing itself to be the successor to the Neo-Babylonian Empire, so I think it's capital would be in the Iraqi region of Babil. Maybe Al-Hila or Al-Musayyib? Fedelede 12:33, October 14, 2010 (UTC)

Fed, sorry for the delayed response I have been very busy lately with work. In regards to your suggestion and having reviewed your map, I don't think it feasible. First, I am creating a new nation in eastern Syria which I have already begun to lay out in the article. Based on discussions between myself and Caeruleus, who is working with me on the Iraq article, we see the nation breaking down into several smaller states. I think it unlikely a superstate would arise in the region. Especially, with Iran likely claiming parts of the old Iraq when it collapses. I also don't see it likely that either the Sunni or Shiite Muslim population would be driven out or taken over by Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac alliance your are suggesting. I think it more logical these Muslim groups would carve out their own nations. I hope this helps answer your questions.--Fxgentleman 02:47, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

I see. Do you think that a state like that but only on the former Iraqi province of Babil would be plausible? Fedelede 02:59, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

I think it is unlikely. If Iraq totally collapsed, it is possible. However, the collapse of Iraq we're planning isn't that drastic. We were thinking a maximum of 4-6 states, which would mainly be based around religious/ethnic lines. Kurdistan and the Assyrian micro-state in northern Iraq are the only confirmed states at the moment, so we'll take your idea into consideration.
Also, Fx, we need to get this article written. We've both been delayed for a while. Caeruleus 01:34, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for responding to Fed, I have been to busy to get back to him. I agree with you in that we need to move forward. Set a time in the evening (after 7:30 PM) over the next few days and we will get together to discuss this via Skype. Just to give you a heads-up though, between my job and some personal things going on I am unsure how much free time I will have over the coming weeks. --Fxgentleman 03:54, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

I'm free Monday through Thursday after 7:30 PM, so you pick a time or just catch me when I'm online. Caeruleus 04:08, October 25, 2010 (UTC)


Crap, I was going to work on it when I got my internet back but since that's happened and I've had writers block since Tuesday, I'm fine with you becoming the caretaker and working on it. Arstar 02:33, November 12, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Once I get started if you have any suggestions, I would be curious to hear them since I would imagine you have done research as well. --Fxgentleman 03:39, November 12, 2010 (UTC)

I actually have done little research, unfortunately. I haven't had any access to the internet and I've been studying the whole week because I have mid-terms right now. What I can tell you is that the island likely would have been harmed much more than in OTL in the 2010 Volcanic eruptions, thats for sure. But besides that I have no boundaries, the article is yours now :) Arstar 03:48, November 12, 2010 (UTC)

Finishing Up

We need to finish up our Iraq article. We've been dragging this out too long. I added a few things so it looks like we're still working on it. Tell me what you think. When are you free this week to chat? Caeruleus 23:49, November 28, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for not responding sooner. I have been busy lately and have not spent alot of time on any of this. If you are free this evening, December 1, I will be available.--Fxgentleman 13:10, December 1, 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. I should be free from at least 5-8 PM, probably later too. We're in the same time zone btw. Caeruleus 19:50, December 1, 2010 (UTC)


In our last discussion, I mentioned the idea of a defense organization in the eastern Mediterranean. It's called the Mediterranean Defense League. Assuming you haven't change your mind since our last discussion, I made Lebanon a founding member. Also, Israel, Jordan, and Al Jazerra will be invited to join, but I know you said you had different plans for Israel and Jordan. It's just a courtesy/policy thing to invite them. Whether they accept or not is up to you. Caeruleus 23:29, December 14, 2010 (UTC)

GSU Flag

Hi Fxgentleman, i made this flag for the Gulf States Union. What you think? Can be the official flag? :) --Katholico 03:42, December 18, 2010 (UTC)

Hi again! emM what think abouth the flag? ^^U --Katholico 02:12, January 8, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I was not able to get back to you sooner regarding this. I have been offline alot the past few weeks between work and vacation. However, I did have a chance to review the flag and although I appreciate the effort you made it is not was I was looking for. It seems a bit crowded, as if you tried to combine the elements of all the flags together. Take a look at the flag being used by the GCC in our time which the GSU is modeled on and you will get an idea of what I am envisioning. If you want to give it a second try afterwards, then please do so and I will look at your results. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 02:27, January 8, 2011 (UTC)


That is weird. I checked the deletion log and could not find it. I hate to say this Fx, but you wouldn't happen to have a copy of your computer of the article do you? Because other than contact wikia, I don't think there is anyway to bring your article back. Mitro 14:18, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Iraq Again

I had some time, so I went through and finished up most of the Iraq article. When you get a chance, read over it and tell me what you think. I left some names and dates blank. They're marked with parentheses. If you could, fill those in too. For example, I know that you once suggested one of Saddam's sons to succeed him, but I don't remember which one.

Also, I could not find out when the GSU invention occurred or the details about it. Could you please write that section?

If you feel the need to change something, feel free to change it. Caeruleus 20:24, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

I wanted to apologize to you for never working on the article like I said. The last few months became more hectic than I planned with my job and I did not simply have the time or energy to do much of anything regarding the site. I am only now finding the time these last few weeks to resume work. I will definately take a look at the article. I had hoped to spend more time on the Middle East but I am having to address issues with my N. American articles at the moment. I am curious as to what you thought of what I added to my MNF article? --Fxgentleman 22:18, March 20, 2011 (UTC)

Whenever you can get to it is fine. No rush. And if you need any help with your Middle East articles, feel free to ask.

I did read your MNF article at one point. I thought it was a good article and dealt with the remaining international/UN forces in the area, something that I think no other article really deals with. Why do you ask? Caeruleus 02:59, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

I was just curious regarding your thoughts, given what I discussed a few months back as to where I wanted to take some of my articles. Thanks for the feedback.--Fxgentleman 03:41, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Anytime. Caeruleus 22:43, March 21, 2011 (UTC)


There is some discussion going on at Talk:Second American Revolution (1983: Doomsday) that would impact the SNU. Please check it out. Mitro 15:10, March 24, 2011 (UTC)


Would you be at all interested in a Constable position? Lordganon 06:12, May 17, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for not responding sooner LG. No joke, I am snowed in by work at my job lately which is why I have not been doing any work recently to my articles. That aside, I am honored by the offer. What exactly would you need from me if I was nominated and became a constable? I am not really clear. Please let me know.--Fxgentleman 14:30, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

No worries, Fx. You're far from the last to reply, lol.

Pretty much, whenever you're around and updating your articles, just keep half an eye out for vandals - they're normally pretty obvious. Constables really only get into the TSPTF and gain rollback powers. Nothing to really worry about, nor would any inactivity have too much impact.

If nothing else, that'd be useful for your own articles, lol.

Lordganon 15:13, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Iraq Once More

Our Iraq article was finally graduated. There are a few blanks that need to be filled though. The GSU intervention section is left unwritten because I don't really know what happened there, if it happened at all. So could you please fill that in? Also, I need the name of an eccentric Iraqi general pre-Doomsday. I have a short-lived "Babylonian Rebellion" mentioned and I need a name for its leader. Or we can remove that section if you want since its more of just an interesting add-on, not something necessary. Caeruleus 15:06, June 7, 2011 (UTC)


You could have just said Caer, lol. I know the two of you have been doing that. Anyhoo...

Yeah, I could Skype in theory, but I can't stand that thing, lol. Writing is better, for sure. Just leave whatever it is on my page, and I'll get back to you. =)

Lordganon 08:23, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks anyway for the response LG. Its just sometimes far easier to explain one's thoughts verbally versus having to write lengthy paragraphs, which I have had to do in the past and have tried to get away from. Yes, me and Caer have just spoken using only the voice portion rather than the video. It is a great tool and has helped to share our ideas quicker, but I realize not everyone is comfortable with using it. I will post my response sometime this day. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 12:02, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, it's not that I'm uncomfortable with it, I just don't like Skype in general and won't use it. I've done that same idea with other platforms many times in the past. Lordganon 19:40, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Fxgentleman. I was wondering if I would be able to add some additions to your article on israel. WITHOUT changing anything you have already created of course. I was just thinking that Israel's position makes it a fascinating piece to recreate a new history for and it would be a shame if it just was left to sit their unworked on. contact me when you can


Thank you for your interest in my article Brad. Although I am interested in hearing suggestions from other writers, I generally prefer to work on my articles solo so I can control the direction of the peice. The only reason I have not added to the article is because I have been unsure how to address what happened in adjacent Egypt since that impacts Isreal. The storyline as to the events on DD and the first few years make absolutely no sense based on what the situation actually was in Egypt in 1983. Given how weird the posed scenario is has thrown me for some time. If you have any thoughts on that I would not mind hearing them. I have been contemplating just giving up and doing my best in moving forward the article after so long.--Fxgentleman 01:21, July 26, 2011 (UTC)


It's alright with me if you take over the article, I no longer have time to update most of the other ones I created.However, I one day do plan to set aside some time for my survivor state in North Caroline, and would like to say that a handful of F-4s were recovered.As long as you leave that provision, I am alright with you taking the article.

--God Bless the United States of America 21:01, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Republic of Iraq (1983: Doomsday)

I have recently adopted the Republic of Iraq concept. I was told that you had specific ideas on how you wanted the nation to turn out. I would defer to your expertise, as you are as much the expert in matters of the Middle East as Vlad is for the Balkans.

Yank 03:45, September 15, 2011 (UTC)


I don't do Skype, or any other such verbal communication over the net. And no, I won't change that position. Lordganon 05:43, October 12, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks anyway for giving me a response. I had hoped to talk with you. Sorry we couldn't work something out. However, I would appreciate having some kind of real time discussion with you short of having to post long messages on a board and wait for answers, which we have been doing. If you have any thoughts as to how we could do something like this, please let me know. I am even willing to provide an email address to have a discussion if you ever want to go in that direction. I did this with Mitro early on. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 09:21, October 12, 2011 (UTC)

Leaving messages like that is my preference.

But, I suppose we may be able to talk on MSN sometime.

Lordganon 13:28, October 12, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to interrupt, but if you guys want real-time communication without using voice, trading personal information, or waiting for answers, you guys could use the IRC room associated with this wiki, or any IRC room really. Caeruleus 14:07, October 12, 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the information Cae, I did not know about that. I will look into it for the future. Appreciate the information.--Fxgentleman 01:19, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

...which is exactly what I said. Learn to read, Caer. Lordganon 06:45, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

And Fx? Since you feel free to insult me on other pages, there's nothing to discuss. Simple and Final. Lordganon 06:48, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

LG, I am a natural born analytical thinker, so that is how I approach many things. Although I consider myself fairly knowledgeable about a number of subjects, when I am going into an area where I have limited or no knowledge, I research it as much as I can. Given I enjoy researching it is nothing for me to study numerous websites and read books about a subject. I generally approach a matter by forming a hypothesis and seeing if my research can back it up. If it can’t, then I drop it. I also bring logic and my own experience into my thinking and reasoning. I don’t just pull theories out of my hat. I do my best to read the various articles in the DD scenario, but given how many there are I freely admit I may remember or catch something. A good thinker is always willing to revise their thoughts given the introduction of new information.

I have not insulted you and am very surprised and baffled why you came to this conclusion. The reason I have wanted to talk with you privately was to find out if there was some issue you had against me about something I had no knowledge of. You have been so vehement in the two recent discussions we have had, I had the distinct impression you were unwilling to give any credence to my thoughts to the point of shutting me down. As writers, we will not always agree, but there has to be some willingness to debate subjects and consider modifications and compromises. I joined this site for the only reason the writers were trying to make this scenario plausible. A lot has changed since it was created and writers have been willing to discuss fundamental issues and make adjustments as needed given early writers did not think about certain things. I asked other writers who have been involved in this project for some time for their input given how important I felt the subject was. The impression you gave me in your comments, was my thoughts held no merit whatsoever and were not worthy of debate or consideration. When another writer supported me to some extent, you attacked them as well. As such, I was honestly not comfortable with the situation and wanted more feedback. Lastly, if my thoughts are so wrong, I would love to read your sources of information since they contradict my sources so I can compare them.--Fxgentleman 14:11, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

I did want to add two further notes LG to my above comments. First, I wanted to apologize for bringing up the issue regarding voice communication again. I knew I had discussed the matter with a writer and thought it was you. When I was reviewing my early conversations with people, I somehow overlooked our previous discussion. I was somewhat embarrassed when I realized my error. Secondly, I never stated you used the actual words ridiculous and implausible in responding to my arguments, because technically you did not. However, what I actually said was I felt you “dismissed my arguments as basically implausible and ridiculous” which is what my distinct impression was based on the tone of your comments. However, I will give you the benefit of the doubt in that when you wrote your comments you did not realize they came off as condescending and dismissive to me. I realize we will are likely to never agree on this matter and there is nothing I can do change that other than moving on and focusing on the discussion at hand. By the way I had problems with the link you provided but eventually located the document and read it. Very fascinating reading. I only wish the entire report had been available. It supported for the most part what I read elsewhere but went into greater depth about how many satellites were affected. So thanks.--Fxgentleman 05:37, October 14, 2011 (UTC)

You posted on numerous pages that I "vehemently dismissed my arguments as basically implausible and ridiculous." I did no such thing. At all. Nor did I dismiss your argument in any way, shape, or form. I merely countered them and told you why you were incorrect. Nor was I dismissive or condescending to you in any form. About the only thing wrong was posting while I was.... well, incredibly annoyed is a good way to put it, I suppose, though note that that was Caer's doing, not yours.

You saying things like that, at all, is putting words in my mouth. That is insulting me. Verbatim. And you went and posted it several times, compounding your insult. If you had any issue you should have said something to me. Yet, you failed completely to do so.

As for Caer? If you look around this site at all you'll find that any "attack" - and that is not the case, whatsoever - has absolutely nothing to do with you. Very often, he reads only half of he replies to, at best, kills his own arguments, is not objective in the least, entirely fails to get a point for weeks, etc. This has been a long-running thing between myself and him for months - heck, likely more than a year by this point, and on numerous talk pages. I freely admit to having little to no patience for him, as a result. I'm aware that's a touch wrong, but he has yet to give me any reason to think otherwise. Think of it as he frequently makes me want to bash my head against a wall out of extreme annoyance.

There was never any issue with us, in the past. But now you've went out of your way to make one, as far as I'm concerned. It can be lessened, but not forgotten. Nor forgiven.

As for voice communication, I'd forgotten entirely that you had said something before.

As for the link, it gave me issues too, at first. It's not a regular PDF file - been modified to make it always read-only - which causes problems. Near as I can tell, it is actually the entire report, too.

Lordganon 07:05, October 14, 2011 (UTC)


FX, I've finished reading through the section on the main talk page. I want to sleep on it, and read through it again before commenting on the issue. I do wonder if we should accept the TL as is, and work from there. That, or reboot the thing completely. That said, I am not against revising canon to make it more plausible - LG's done so with Superior, I've done so with Texas, and many others have done so with their own articles. The only other thing I'll say at this point is that this needs to be talked out, and all of the ramifications thought through, before we make any kind of decision regarding changing history. BrianD 03:05, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

It looks like this is where I should post this. Hi, Fx. I saw the discussion earlier and have been working on looking at the satellites that were probably up at the time. Quite a few of them are STILL up. And many of them are geo-synchronous and thus way out of the way of any shenanigans on the earth. Even the lowest comsats are at 300 miles much higher than the two bombs the USSR used to blast the EMP's over the US. The one the US did over Russia, at 300 miles, might have knocked a few low flying ones down though. NONE of the atmospheric explosions would have affected the satellites themselves.

I'm still working on a list of satellites that were probably in use on DD. It looks like an adequate number of equatorial geo-sync satellites were up so that South America and Australia, as well as South Africa and Southeast Asia, would have had full communications with NO disruptions between them (apart from the air bursts in Australia, that is. I'll finish work on satellites launched in 1981 (and still up today!) and get back on it Friday afternoon. I'm with Brian on this one (I have had my reservations since I got in, but a 'reboot' just seems too drastic given the 'rules.' But we admins can bat it about. SouthWriter 04:47, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

Gentlemen, thanks for the response and consideration, which is all I ask. It was never my intention to figuratively toss a grenade into the room so to speak, but it was an area that has been bothering for some time and I have been reticent about raising it until now. I never questioned any of this early on given I assumed others had done the needed research. A while ago when I mentioned something in passing to a writer about weather monitoring and there being no satellites and they told me the satellites were okay, which puzzled me because I thought they were destroyed. So I have been reading and reading and the more I found told me the original premise may have been flawed. So frankly I have no clue why certain areas of the world could not have contacted each other by landlines or satellites shortly afterwards. In fact, the information I have read says atmospheric disturbances over zones which have been struck should last no more than several days to weeks given the number of weapons. However, I will post some more thoughts on the main discussion page about my thoughts and research, which I have a feeling may be in the same area you are exploring. I have been trying to track down what satellites were in orbit and have had little success. I did find out there was about 130 or so in orbit at the time of which about 60 were defunct. My research on satellite orbits sounds like it matches what you are seeing.--Fxgentleman 14:18, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

Norfolk Naval Base

I know its been awhile sent you that warning about the edits on your Norfolk Naval Base article, and I just wanted to say sorry for those edits.Enclavehunter 05:35, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Oh. I just read your profile page, and you said don't edit your articles. Well, I made an little grammar change on your Israel article, and I didn't know about your rules until now. So sorry for that edit.Enclavehunter 05:40, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

EH, I appreciate you came forward and let me know about what you did. However, I was already aware of the changes and was not concerned. I have absolutely no issues with minor gramatical changes or word corrections, since it does not affect the context. As to my earlier message I am sorry if it came across as a warning. I had just taken over the article from someone else and did not want to see another writer invest a great deal of time in something I was planning to alter. I invest a great deal of time researching, writing, and plotting where I am going to take my articles so that is why I have asked other writers to not disturb them. Because of the nature of my job, I often do not have the time to contribute, but I try to monitor my articles for integrity until I can return to them. Thank you for your honesty. --Fxgentleman 12:34, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Your welcome. I like the "EH" part at the beginning. I think I'll stick with itEnclavehunter 20:26, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Satellites, 1983

I've read the discussion a couple of times and am not sure if there's much I can add to it. I don't have that level of tech knowledge. As always, I would want to find a solution that best preserves what has already been written. So as so often happens, I agree in principle with what Lordganon says while rolling my eyes at his rude and grating way of saying it. Benkarnell 07:06, November 3, 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Ben for your response and the comments you made which reflect my feelings. I have been away from the discussion because of the demands of my job, however I am still heavily researching the subject in order to present an even more comprehensive response regarding satellites and communication overall post DD to the group for consideration. I am hoping to have something done by next week depending on my schedule. Once that is done, my desire is to see a friendly, good, and honest debate among all of the writers which could resolve the discussion. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 12:17, November 3, 2011 (UTC)


I'll take a look at it in a few hours, once I get free. You should contact Benkarnell too, as he is the original editor for Hawaii in the timeline. BrianD 03:39, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I was not sure whether or not to contact Ben as well, so I am glad you will both be discussing it. No rush on the subject, when you can get to it is fine with me. I look forward to both of your thoughts.--Fxgentleman 19:59, November 20, 2011 (UTC)

I'll read through the discussion again, and add my thoughts there sometime this evening. At first glance on the discussion, I do tend to agree with LG on the idea that the TL should be tweaked more than overhauled. I definitely agree that the Vinson should replace the Nimitz. BrianD 19:14, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. Somehow I missed the article on the ANZC Commonwealth, though the word "Nimitz" appears distinctly in the very first line. I am pretty sure I at least glanced at the Gathering Order paragraph in my search. I was probably tired or distracted when I glanced through it. I am sorry I doubted your research on that. Your information is always very detailed. Having read the article, I see that your points were 'spot on' as the Brits say. By the way, let me say here that your points about the US Navy being duty bound is also 'spot on' -- if Hawaii was on their original route, that is most definitely where they would have headed. SouthWriter 02:10, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

No problem South. I posted a follow-up on the discussion page which I don't know if you have read yet outlining the situation on the article. It was not until after I read your comments the other day that it suddenly occured to me that perhaps everyone may not know what I was talking about. Let me know what you think regarding the question I posted about what to do with the article as well as my writing the new piece on the Vinson. Brian already posted a response. By the way, did you ever get my message I sent you via Facebook a few weeks ago? Since I never heard from you I wondered if it was received. I try to be very thorough with my research. I am something a research fanatic one of those folks who lives for the thrill of the hunt for information. I often just pick a subject of interest and research it for fun. It started a long time ago for me as an outgrowth of my love for history. I often research the birthdays of people I know upon request and give them a 25 page report of what happened on that day and why its important. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 02:17, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

I replied on the discussion page. Thanks for the clarification, I look forward to the new article(s). I am sorry, I don't check Facebook as much as I ought to. Ever since they changed the notification system, I don't see the notices they do send - overlooking them at times. I get about 25 or so emails at that email box per day, most of them from things I don't check. Things get deleted regular back to the last 100 emails. I need to unsubscribe to some old stuff, but never can decide what to ditch. Most of them were important when I subscribed.
Well, I'd better get to bed before my 'second wind' kicks in and I regret the late hours later. Good night and I hope your Thanksgiving meal sets well overnight!  :-) SouthWriter 05:34, November 25, 2011 (UTC)

Nuclear Bomb "science"

Hi, Fx. I have a few moments before going to bed (I have to be up at 6 and it is 11:30 pm here). First, I will quote from the Multi-National Force article:

"It is unknown whether it was a sea or land based launch. Instead of detonating in the air, the warhead malfunctioned and plunged into the Mediterranean Sea near the Eisenhower before exploding. The resulting detonation vaporized the Eisenhower and several supporting ships which were nearby."

Two questions, it is my understanding that the trigger of a nuclear bomb must be engaged in order for it to explode. If the bomb is to be an air burst, the trigger is most likely an altimeter set to pull the trigger at a given altitude. If it passes the altitude without engaging, then the bomb is a dud. It falls to the ground and is 'live' but awaits the signal that would trigger it. Ground-bursts, on the other hand, would probably be a simple contact fuse. An undersea explosion (designed to obliterate a fleet, for instance, could be either by water pressure or contact with the bottom of a more continental shelf (for maximum effect). These are my impressions only, so a little information can be dangerous. :-)

The other question is simply the use of the word "vaporize." How close does a nuclear bomb have to be to actually "vaporize" a whole aircraft carrier, much less its support ships. Complete destruction for sure, but vaporization is probably only complete within a small area (the Wikipedia article doesn't say how far, but only that the bomb itself is 'vaporized').

Oh yeah, the quotation does not say whether the fleet was targeted or was collateral damage due to the malfunction over coastal Lebanon. I doubt if ICBM's could target fleets (which are unpredictable), and if it were taken out by a sub there were very few, if any nuclear torpedoes in 1983. Besides, I have my doubts about a submarine fleet out there without leadership launching nuclear bombs at all. It is possible, and maybe even probable, but the scenario is mostly about ICBM's. I may be totally wrong here, and you are far better at research than I am. But again I am going on what I understand to be true from general knowledge gathered over the past decades.

Well, the clock shows it is after mid-night, so I will close for now. I look forward to your reply. --SouthWriter 05:00, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

South, my apologies for the lengthy delay in responding. As the article on the MNF was the first I wrote after I joined back in 09 and you raised some good questions, I thought I would go back and take a second look and do some additional research and contemplation before I got back to you. I will do my best to answer your questions.

My research led me to believe US carrier task groups would be a priority target in a war between east and west. I presumed single aircraft carriers like the Eisenhower would be targets as well given their firepower and the fact they carried nuclear weapons. When I originally laid out the scenario, I viewed the Eisenhower as being the main target and the remainder of the MNF Fleet as collateral damage. Your question though got me to thinking if the Soviets would have considered the entire fleet a threat. If the Foch, the French carrier, was carrying nuclear weapons as well, which I am unsure if it was, then I could see the entire group as being considered a threat worthy of neutralization. Theoretically, the fleet could have attacked the Soviet client state of Syria; perhaps threaten Soviet naval ships either in the Mediterranean or those trying to enter it from the Black Sea or Indian Ocean; support NATO forces in Turkey, Greece, or elsewhere; or maybe even have attacked the USSR itself. However, this is all speculation on my part. The problem I see in addressing who the target would have been is the information would have likely been lost and the writer would not know. That said, I can see a scenario where a news report comes out twenty some odd years after the attack from an ex-Soviet saying who the target was and I could work it in to make it clearer to the reader.

Your thought about the warhead is accurate. I have been reading up about nuclear weapons in response to a question as to whether a warhead launched by an ICBM could prematurely detonate in the upper atmosphere. All the data I have read tells me warheads are built with a plethora of triggers and safety devices designed for the express purpose of preventing the warhead from not detonating until it has in fact reached its' preset target. When these various stages are not carried out, the warhead immediately becomes useless and falls to the Earth where it is smashed, thus releasing the nuclear materials, or it simply acts as a dud waiting for something to activate it. I think it more likely a chip or gyroscope would malfunction and knock it just off course onto a secondary target. So unfortunately the chance of my scenario is no more likely than the suggestion a warhead could prematurely explode in the upper atmosphere. I also agree the use of the word vaporize is likely inaccurate as well.

So I have been pondering how I could make this work. I agree an ICBM would not be used for the same reason you said, they are pre-programmed and I doubt one would have been specifically retargeted for the MNF fleet. It would seem the likeliest weapons would be either a cruise missile launched by a bomber or fighter jet; or a submarine launched ballistic missile, sea launched cruise missile, or nuclear torpedo. My best thought is a anti-ship missile launched by a Soviet submarine containing a 200 kiloton nuclear warhead. I would imagine at least one Soviet nuclear sub was likely shadowing the fleet at the time and would have been in a position to attack it. There were two Soviet ships in the vicinity, including an intelligence ship, so it stands to reason the sub would know through them where everyone was located. Given the MNF ships were scattered about in various anchorages some distances apart (the Eisenhower in fact was 37 miles off shore) I think there would a limitation to what could be done. I theorize the sub would likely aim for the Eisenhower, presuming it to be the greatest threat, fire, and run, expecting what was not destroyed in the fleet would be damaged. The missile strikes the Eisenhower, at say the waterline, and explodes destroying it and several nearby ships and causes the damage I described. It would require some rewriting but I think it would work.

What do you think, does it sound workable? Please let me know. Thanks.--Fxgentleman 01:27, December 23, 2011 (UTC)

As usual, your research skils amaze me. As I mentioned, from what I can tell so far, the United States had replaced all their nuclear torpedoes in 1976 with conventional weapontry. I know that the Soviets had nuclear torpedoes as well (they lost several off Italy in 1970), so it is possible they still had some on submarines. However, the SALT agreements probably had mandated their removal, leaving it unlikely that they would have been using them anymore. Yes, they had SLBM's but whether they had nuclear torpedoes is doubtful. If you can find verification that they even might have had them in use, I'd say go with it! The Communist government was not adverse to lying if it were to its advantage. In fact, I'm sure that governments of a democratic nature do as well! But anyway, soviet subs would certainly have been in the area, so I'd say even conventional weapons would be sufficient to cripple the fleet. SouthWriter 04:08, December 23, 2011 (UTC)

Earlier this year I obtained a book listing the military strength for all the nations as of 1983. I previously posted the pages regarding the Soviet Union's nuclear forces which you can find at If you look at the last page under SLCM these are the armaments the Soviets had in this area at time and were the choices I was considering. I researched the various weapons to see what the best choice would be. I discounted the SSN-3 because the sub would have to surface. The SSN-7 however could be launched from underwater but a sub could only do so at about 30 meters/100 feet. The SSN-9 Siren or SSN-12 Sandbox seemed a excellent choice since they were both installed on Soviet subs. I agree hitting the fleet with non-nukes is tempting, especially since the SSN-12 can be fired in volleys. I can't help but think they might try to use a nuke instead.

However, I was considering a second alternative which I did not mention originally because I was unsure about it. There were two Soviet ships nearby at the time, a Krivak-1 missile frigate, Leningradsky Komsomolets, and an electronic spy ship. The Komosomolets carried among its armaments SSN-14 Silex Missiles which were anti sub warfare weapons equipped to take off and drop attached torpedoes with small 5 kiloton warheads which would then sink an enemy sub. However, the missiles could be modified to strike ships by programming the torpedos to stay attached to the missile until it struck the target. The frigate also carried separate torpedoes. Having given it some more thought if the frigate had launched all four rockets it could have easily destroyed several of the ships, including the Eisenhower, then turned to attack the others with standard torpedoes before being sunk. The more I think about it I like this idea. Thoughts? --Fxgentleman 03:51, December 24, 2011 (UTC)

Re: Communication Discussion

Im so sorry about that, I saw nobody had posted in over a month and I thought it was dead. Since it took up a lot of space, I'd suggest that you restart the discussion on a fresh page and then post a citation linking to the Fundamental Issues Archive where I put it. If that wouldn't work, I'd be more than happy to unarchive it for you.

PS: It's good to see you again, I know we've had our differences in the past but I just returned after a year of hiatus and I hope to start a fresh note.

PSS: Just out of curiousity, what are your ideas for Iceland? Lordganon and I were wondering about that. Arstar 02:02, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

No problem Arstar, I consider everything from the past water under the bridge. I have been doing some heavy duty research on the whole EMP/Communication thing but I wanted to make sure I had all my ducks together before posting. Question though, it is going to be lengthy, like a few pages long, so I don't want to take up a large amount of space on the discussion page. I was thinking I would PDF my report and post it as such. Thoughts?

As to Iceland, I will be glad to share my ideas. Give me a day or so to get my thougths together and I will post them here. I would love to have your input on the DEW question I posted earlier since you originally created the article. What do you think about the discussion? If what I am saying is implausable I will gladly make changes.

I did have something I wanted to approach you about the US Atlantic Remnant since I gather that is your baby unless I am mistaken. I am working on an idea concerning the carrier Lexington, an aging WW II carrier which was running out of NAS Pensacola doing flight instruction in 83. It carried no nukes and likely wouldn't have been targeted. I have been toying around with it surviving, albeit damaged by EMP, picking up survivors, and heading towards your country and joining it. What do you think?

I am available for realtime verbal discussions via Skype or by email at the address on my profile page if you want to have a discussion on something or toss an idea around.--Fxgentleman 02:25, December 4, 2011

I think a PDF or even a wordpad file would be convenient although it would be hard to reply to without constantly having to cite back to it. But I think what you said definitely needs to get heard as I do generally see that the communications area is one that is generally paradoxical between what different authors write on their nations. I'll have to get back to you in the morning, I'm fighting going to sleep so I'm not really in my mind-state to get together the facts for Iceland to state a proper response but expect a reply by Sunday afternoon at the latest and I'm trying to finish up a large overhaul on several of my projects such as finishing the Republic of Florida which has been in a limbo for a while and South,LG, and I were looking at several possible new States for the reconstituted United States as I was thinking of having California join the North American Union sometime soon, and possibly the United States soon after, although that may be more difficult due to border issues. Have you considered Sierra Nevada joining the NAU at any point?

Anyways I'll have to get back to you tomorow. I'll be sure to reply no later than the afternoon. Arstar 06:47, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

I am up way to late on my end since it is 1:53 AM. I'll get back to you later on Sunday regarding your questions as well. Don't worry so much about the Iceland question. I decided to pull the DEW reference but I would still value your thoughts on the whole issue. Talk to you later. Goodnight.--Fxgentleman 06:55, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

Don't know what on earth Arstar was thinking, Fx. I've just spent 20 mins fixing all of the stuff he did with that page, including restoring all disscussions. Figured you'd like to know.

And please refrain from putting it in PDF.

Lordganon 09:08, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

I am open to suggestions regarding the subject. My report to the group will take up an enormous amount of space, several pages at least in length, when I finish and and will include exhibits. I have been contemplating for a time as what to do when I finished since I can not simply post it as a standard message due to size. I considered posting it as a reference article for use by future writers but discounted that since I did not see any precedence and if I don't do it as a PDF, what format can I use. I want to take up as little space as I can when I post.--Fxgentleman 15:14, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

Post it as is on the page. Lordganon 21:13, December 4, 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Fx, the size of the project sounds a bit large for the main talk page. However, it could posted as an article composed either as a full 'proposal' or, better than that, a 'sandbox' project with a link from the discussion page. Another place for a link would be at the bottom of the page of "Communications and mass media" article. The only problem there would be hopping from the article to the linked pages. If it is a 'proposal' article it would at least have its own talk page. Once we have come to some conclusions the proposal page can be marked "obsolete" and the conclusions reached can be incorporated into whatever articles need adjusting. The original page, then, would be there for easy reference. Another idea would be that it could be treated as an 'official' investigation and become a full fledged article of its own (either a WCRB or League of Nations 'document'). SouthWriter 03:54, December 5, 2011 (UTC)

If it's so long you see the need to post as a PDF, then as LG said, post it here, but break it up into subsections. This will allow editors to navigate their way more easily through the document (as opposed to one large behemoth of a post). BrianD 06:45, December 5, 2011 (UTC)

DD Info for Las Vegas

Hello. I'm Godfrey Raphael, and I've been contributing to the 1983: Doomsday timeline for some time now. Just now, I've adopted the Las Vegas article and made it a proposal again in the intent of making it a nuked city article. LG recommended me to you because he said you were the caretaker of the Nevada survivor state. Can you tell me what you've planned for Las Vegas and its surrounding areas? Thank you. Godfrey Raphael 13:51, March 12, 2012 (UTC)

Hello GR, sorry for taking so long to get back to you.

I never had anything per se planned for Las Vegas. Having traveled to NV quite a few times and studied the state overall, I felt its future would lie to the north. Except for a few isolated areas in the south, those around favorable climates or water sources, I have always seen the region reverting to desert and essentially abandoned. I know a number of writers have hypothesized about some sort of mini-state in southern NV, in particular around LV, but frankly I have always felt it to be highly unrealistic.

My general plan had always been to leave LV Valley an abandoned, bomb blasted, and radioactive ruin slowly reverting to the desert. With the changing weather patterns and increased rain over time would likely result in some accumulation in certain areas, likely around Mount Charleston. The city would be just another icon of the past consigned to history. I have always viewed the SNU as being the successor to all of the former state of NV, including the south. I had planned over time to have the SNU repopulate areas in the south where they could. In 2010, I had a farming community established in Pahrump as an example. My suggestion would be if you have not already, please take a look at my SNU article first to see what I wrote about DD.

So I am okay if you want to proceed on the article. All I ask is you keep it plausible and in line with what I have stated above and in my article thus far. When you feel you are ready with the piece, please let me know so I can take a look at it. If you think I can be of any assistance, drop me a message or email me. Thanks and I look forward to seeing what you write. --Fxgentleman 02:21, March 20, 2012 (UTC)

This is ming777 from dropping by. :)

Mikelima777 (talk) 07:08, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Query about some info

I'm just wondering what is the status of the former nation of Syria by 2012?  Also, what is the nature of the Gulf States Unions.


Mikelima777 (talk) 01:01, January 14, 2013 (UTC)


Hello. I have been getting emails telling me of your changes regarding the hyphen on restablish and restablisment in my articles. I write as part of my job and my use of the hyphen reflects how my organization does it. I am aware there is a difference of opinion in some circles regarding the hyphen. I have no issue with corrections if need be, but I just don't see the point here. Thanks.--Fxgentleman (talk) 11:49, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

To accentuate the double E - which you have left out in this message.

However, perhaps I am going overboard.

The hyphen in this type of situation has fallen into general disuse. I still prefer it in some cases, where my initial reaction to a word causes confusion. In the word 'cooperate', I see 'coop' first, where I would rather see co-operate. Likewise, 'rees' instead of re-establish. Old fashioned I am, perhaps, but then I'm old enough to be so. EoGuy (talk) 15:27, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Well, its not an end of the world scenario for me. It just caught my attention. I have been on indefinate hiatus from the site since early last year and don't visit that often. Since then, I just monitor my articles via email alert to make sure nothing happens to them. I noted during my visit you have been doing work like this, so kudoes in that respect. As to being old, I am just shy of fifty here, so we are all getting old. As they say it just means we are getting wiser. If you ever want to talk further, email me at the address in my profile. --Fxgentleman (talk) 01:02, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

The Middle East

Hey Fx, the above post caught my attention, along with the situation in the Middle East in the Doomsday timeline. I've noticed that you haven't written anything new for a very long time (even by the standards of a wiki project such as this one). I hope this does not come of as impolite, but if you are not planning to do anything with them, it would be best that you leave them to the community to finish them. The Middle East, as it stands, is quite eventless, and it really could be a place for some truly interesting ideas and events. Vladivostok (talk) 11:17, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

If you would be willing, please send me an email via the email listed in my profile and we can discuss this matter further. Thanks.--Fxgentleman (talk) 12:54, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

Re:Can You Help with Error

I am not quite sure what your issue is. There appears to be no page titled "Talk:History of Israel (1983: Doomsday)". Can you clarify, or give me the exact link you with for me to delete. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 03:24, June 11, 2013 (UTC)

I had just created my new article and went to the discussion page to post a comment. I thought I was doing it correctly. When I clicked on go back to the page, figuring it would take me back to the article, it indicated nothing existed. It appears like a created a seperate article, however I am unsure. Here is the link to the page: Does this help?--Fxgentleman (talk) 03:35, June 11, 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I have to go given the late hour and when I have to get up for work. Please just let me know when you can if you were able to help me. Thanks very much for your time. --Fxgentleman (talk) 04:02, June 11, 2013 (UTC)

You are absolutely right, I wouldn't have seen your post on your own talk page (most here just go back and fourth between talk pages). I have deleted the link you have gave me, so I hope this solves your problem. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 04:21, June 11, 2013 (UTC)

I just thought I would check one last time before going to bed. Thanks very much for the help. I try to avoid that whole back and fourth thing by trying to respond on my page but I tend to forget that not everyone thinks about it. Thanks again for everything and have a good night.--Fxgentleman (talk) 04:33, June 11, 2013 (UTC)


No Problem.

Yes, had several reports lately of those e-mails not working lately. Been quite a while, actually, since I heard of them working. You're going to have to check manually, imo.

Lordganon (talk) 09:42, June 6, 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I am Saturn120, what I guess you would call a young lad on Althistory Wiki. I have been a big fan of your work, and 1983:DD in general. However, when I took a read at the Delmarva I was saddened to see that it wasn't edited in over three years. Seeing that I would like to carry on your works and the general quality of 1983:DD, I ask if it would be okay for me to adopt the Delmarva page of the 1983:DD timeline. Thank you, and I respect your desion in advance. Saturn120 (Talk/Blog) 04:38, February 3, 2015 (UTC)

1983: Doomsday

Hi, I wondering if I can contribute Molossia. Regards. --Lord Maquiavelo (Mi discusión) 16:38, June 14, 2015 (UTC)

Iceland (DD)

Hello there, I was just wondering if you would be okay with me contributing and expanding on your article on Iceland for 1983: Doomsday. I noticed it hadn't been touched for a while and I felt it needed an update. FP(Now 10% edgier!!!) 09:55, January 30, 2016 (UTC)

Doomsday Kuwait page

Hello, this is sultanbonzu ( and wanted to know if i could adpot your Kuwait page for the 1983 TL? 


Hello! I saw you were the creator of the Delmarva page for the 1983 Doomsday story, and I was wondering if you'd be willing to allow me to adopt the article. I hope you're doing well! GryffindorKrypton (talk) 02:05, April 2, 2020 (UTC)GryffindorKrypton


I would  like to adopt the serria neveda union

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