|Hello and welcome to the Alternate History Wiki!|
We are a community for creating fictional alternative histories. We hope you will feel at home here and wish you good luck contributing to our ever-growing collection of timelines.
Some other helpful reference pages:
Some general tips:
you probably may see as the first message of the wall but i'm a native morrocan could i adopt morroco doomdsay? is would be cool message me in talkpage!
Adoption project and ideas
You seem to really put life back into the 1983:Doomsday timeline and I really appreciate that. Just remember to stay in the encyclopedic style like I said back in Leicester and to get proper authorization for first editing any articles such as the WRCB news front page of the timeline as well as Spain (myself I almost got banned over an argument regarding such adoptions rights so I just want the process to be fair for everyone duh :D ).
Now I wanted to have your opinion on a blog post I made regarding the, back then, very inactive doomsday timeline and how it could be fixed. I'd like to have your opinion and if you would willing to back some of them up in the main talk page. Note: the New Caledonia exemple isn't all that relevant now that I added some stuff in it (it was back then a BLANK page lol). Same with the China page. Also I didn't knew that Tatcher died in 2013 so I tough she'd make it in the 2020s...oops.
And because of that if that's okay with you...I would just personally love to be the one to take care of the French Southern Territories republic, Aroostook and everything related to Canada that I think needs an almost complete makeover. And I also plan to adopt the timeline itself (yup you heard me right) so I can be the supervisor of that renaissance inside the timeline (and make sure rookies aren't deviating away into patriotic nationalist shenanigans that don't make any sense given the context).
Well, that's all and I'm eager for your views on this.
p.s. you can actually remove that adoption banner in Spain now if you effectively adopted it. I just putted it here to encourage editing back into this timeline.
Hello SigmaHero045 ! Thank you so much for letting me adopt Spain and for helping to bring 1983: Doomsday back to life.
I read your blog post and I agree with a lot of points you make. Many articles that have been widely accepted have been simply left as proposals for nearly a decade (one example I can think of is that of the Beatles in this timeline), and I think a lot of those should be welcomed in.
As for Mrs Thatcher, yes she did indeed pass away in 2013, so in a current setting (as it is a live timeline currently ongoing) she can't be the one to reunify the English successor states. However, there is a candidate who could, and a few users have mentioned his charisma in this timeline: Edward Poll, head of the OBN. The real-life Edward Poll is actually a real British Conservative politician from that sort of Woodbridge area.
I'm absolutely 100% cool with you adopting the French Southern Territories and Canada. This now will definitely mark a new era for this timeline, as you said, a renaissance. Cheers!
p.s. Do you agree with Carlos Javier being crowned King of Spain and changing the article name from Republic of Spain to Kingdom of Spain? Just to confirm with you now that you're the chief!
MrWoodward (talk) 10:11, March 4, 2020 (UTC)
Ha ha, it's quite funny to be called "chief" :).
But no I'm not the chief here, I gave up trying to adopt the timeline itself because it would have been too complicated, too contentious and beside, I'm already de facto a co-chief here (with a blessing by Imperium Guy and NuclearVacuum, two of the TSPTF aka the admins of the wiki) so it's kinda useless I figured out (in fact the procedure of canonization into the timeline already gives a moderating power to all users). Now for your idea of monarchy, you need to put it into a talk page that can be seen to other users who'll approve or not of your ideas (or more often, will like it with justifications for the move and some changes into it). I think the main talk page of the timeline is perfect for that sort of big change disscussion. If nobody objects it (or notice it), reput, as a last call for objecting, your desired changes into the talk page of the Spain DD article itself. After a few days (IF you properly adopted the article given the rules of adoption of the wiki ) you're 100% free to go. If not, have consensus and THEN do it in accordance with was agreed on, simple rules to assure some order here.
Now I'd like some things before you do such changes (like in Leicester): first, give some context behind the monarchist envies of the spaniards and how it survived Doomsday. I want to know why it precisely happens in the late 2010s-early 2020s. Why not before and why not later (that's proper realism)? History is a series of causes and consequences, so what's the cause to happen it in this precise form and this precise time to put it simply? How did it lead to this? I want some context (that can be helped by you reading everything related to the spanish crown in this timeline and the post-DD Spain, specifically the republic you work on, to assure a coherent non-contradicting context). That can remind you of one of my points I made in my blog post about the "void" caused by a lack of proper cultural, sociological and political context inside the world of Doomsday and its more recent years even if it is the MAIN catalysor behind actual events, like in our world. Can you do that for me? I know you can do it! Just remember to have the proper 1983:DD encyclopedic tone and to be realist (you'll be more convicing in the talk pages as a result).
After that, I'd like to see the method you used to figure out why Carlos Javier and not someone else would be choosen as king (did you read the actual order of succession for the crown in 1983, I didn't, I just want to know)? Also, detail as much the procedure and proper adoption of the monarchy (like the vote and public disscussions before the official act).
It might not be the best place to be heard in the current debate over the future of England (seems like my idea caught on :D ). But Edward Polls would NOT be even a somewhat popularly approved as a monarch. Simply because of a deep cultural attachment to nobility and aristocracy in the English culture (just look at the House of Lords) and I don't think Polls have noble heritage. It would be more HIS action rather than a divise but somewhat popular decision. Many dioceses still recognize Andrew as their leader (Anglican church). In tradition, the royal is the head of state because of being the head to the church, A civilian couldn't fill that role with no widespread support outside of a very few ultranationalists. There's a reason why the post-DD states are mostly monarchies by actual nobility. After a conflict like the Leicester war, they want comfort, they want to get closer to the pre-DD England. Long history of England before DD proves the affection and importance the monarchs have there. Imagine how fueled the popular disscussion in New Britain would be, very nationalistic (the good non-chauvinist kind) ideas of "going back to the old country" would surge in approval. The fact that they left Old Britain kinda becomes a regret in public conscience (not out of hate towards Africans or South Africa but of having lost something fondamental to who they are) and in politicians circles. It's a trigger moment (kinda like the brexit moment in our timeline ;) ) that complety changes public perspective. Look at King Andrew's visits in the early 2010s in Old Britain: He's still beloved by many MANY people and actually inconsciously shows an attachment for the monarch towards the old country. Cleveland is lead by a relative of Andrew, how would she react to such a thing in plus of the popular hate? Would she invite Andrew to annex Cleveland in resistance to such takeover of power? To reunite England and New Britain? A civil war WOULD broke out (see the importance of cultural and sociological factors in history?) and by popular support and better military, the Windsors WOULD win. It just makes more sense and would be a torrific way of ending the 2010s political turmoil in the region. New Britain rebecoming the United Kingdom...but the United Kingdom of England and South Africa (as an equal constituent country).
What do you think?
Well, according to what it says happened in Spain on that fateful day in 1983, the King of Spain Juan Carlos I and all of the main members of the royal family (including the heir apparent Prince Felipe and the rest of his siblings living in the Palace of Zarzuela) died when the bomb hit Madrid. So the main Spanish royals and the central government in the Congress of Deputies were all killed on Doomsday. This essentially means that the legitimate Spanish branch of the Bourbons was 100% wiped out. It is extinct. Not the whole Bourbon dynasty, only the Spanish branch which Francisco Franco restored in '75.
Obviously since the Spanish successor states didn't have the correct tools to communicate and were in isolation for many years (even today the state known as the Spanish Regency which claims to be the true Spain maintains very little contact with neighbouring states like the United Republic of Castile and León), the most monarchist politicians who survived Doomsday spent many many years hoping to find a suitable candidate. Which finally led to them finding Carlos Javier de Borbón-Parma, a distant cousin of Juan Carlos, who was in the rural Netherlands (he is a Dutch citizen) when Doomsday struck. He is a Catholic, he is a Bourbon and he speaks fluent Spanish. The only problem is (a big problem for those who seriously question historical Spanish legitimacy): he is a Carlist. In case you don't know what this means, back in the mid-19th century, Spain got plunged into a civil war between the liberal supporters of the young queen Isabel and the absolutist faction that supported the late king Ferdinand's brother Carlos, who claimed that he was the rightful heir (there previously was a law that stated that women couldn't inherit the throne, a law which the late king abolished so his daughter could succeed him). Even today in our TL this is a problem that still divides Spanish monarchists. I'll ask the community what they think, because if Carlos Javier is to be crowned, it will anger many "legitimists" (who don't have a candidate at all, because they all got nuked).
Also, I really like your idea to finally unify the successor states. The United Kingdom of England and South Africa. Maybe you could take charge of that? The only question I have concerning that is what of Edward Poll? Quite a few people in the talk page like his "character" in this TL. In this possible civil war you speak of, what side would Edward Poll take? Would he pose a third party, therefore making it a conflict between 3 sides: the states with their own monarchies, the Windsors and the "Poll-ists" (sorry cant think of a better name)? Let me know what you think!
MrWoodward (talk) 17:25, March 5, 2020 (UTC)
Never have I seen before a more carefully explain in such details a conflict I had no idea even existed (blame that on my history classes only talking about Spain during the reconquista, Christopher Columbus, the conquest of the americas by the conquistadors, the economic crash after that wich led Spain to lose its position of high power in Europe, with the spanish civil war to conclude)! You got a 12/10 on the context and convinced me as well, great job! Now make sure to do the same on how this restoration of the monarchy goes out and you 100% justify this new era for Spain as the Kingdom of Spain. If you don't have any objections from other editors, go for it! Just make sure that the infoboxes in the article reflect both eras (have one for the republican era and another for the constitutional monarchy) : have the top one to be the present kingdom of spain and the republican Spain (the one currently present) in the history section of the country page. Just a suggestion on how to do it. Also, great occasion to restore in use the pre DD flag but to preserve the old one in the article for historical purposes (when it'll talk about the regency period). His personality as well of being a guy in our TL who clearly have a desire for kinghood is definitely helping.
I'm sorry but because of college I don't have enough spare time and energy right now to undergo such a massive task that is this civil war (who must be convinced to the other users as well). I'd really love to but until next weekend at least I can't help it right now (after that, I'd be more than happy to help). You should present our arguments to the talk page right now to balance the debate. They at the talk page seriously downgrade the impact of such a decision, people love Poll as a new prime minister of some sort, a return to normalcy in terms of civilian power. But for him to pervert the codes of the royalty sacred to english culture will NOT go well for him. It's one thing to be the next de facto prime minister of England, it's another thing to pretend to be its monarch without royal blood who'll be the head of the influencial anglican church that mostly recognize Andrew as the king. This would be considered an attack in times of instability to the english identity following a full decade of war, thing that Andrew and his relatives on the old Britain would definitely be attached to (or will be attached again under pressures from fired up nationalism). The civilian populace of Old Britain and New Britain clearly realize right now the momentum to reunite the kingdom as it used to be before DD that's at their doorstep (and how important tradition is important in restoring the English national culture and attachment). Also, Cleveland and Northumbria would definitely be on the Windsors side because of their monarchs being relatives to Andrew who are also attacked in their legitimacy by Poll's power fever and who whould benefit by being under an Andrew-led kingdom.
It would play out like this I think : Woodbridge, Newolland (because of a non noble monarch), southern England (popular local anti-monarchy sentiments) and Matlock (because of their bad humans right records, almost fascist governemnt and crooks in charge that would lose power and governement under a democratic human rights respectful England) vs New Britain, Cleveland, Northumbria, Southern Scotland (dependency upon Northumbria and popular love for the southern neighbour), Lancaster (because of the legacy of the Lord-Lieutenant), Westmorland (protectorate of Lancaster) and Lindsey (not for that long because they re litteraly surrendered by Newolland, you see how a conflict would end between the two). Essex would just stay neutral because of their isolationist attitude. The New London part of the Celtic Alliance would discretly with partisans of the Windsors inside the union, contrary to the neutral stance of the Union itself, financially support the Windsors side. I can't really say much about Norfolk and West Suffolk because I can't really grasp who they are. Also, is the Ipswich Incident still going on? If so, that would be a divise factor against the pollists. Both sides would try to win popular favor in the lands that are under no one's control in Britain since Doomsday (the big light beige section between the celtics and the other british nations). These stateless communities would see in Andrew a saviour coming back with the hope of having things as they used to be before 1984 (how could the Pollists convince people that weren't under the OBN control that this random dude no one there heard from can be a safe monarch when the windsor king is there?). A non-heavily opposed Edward Poll is unrealistic, the post-doomsday world is no excuse to do things that makes no sense (aka 1989 War timeline).
What do you think?
|Windsors||Pro-independence successor states||Pollists|
|Financial support:||Financial support:|
MrWoodward (talk) 21:54, March 8, 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I'm here in quarantine and ready to go. First, we must be clear about the context leading to such a war (because we must remember: this is a very VERY major turn of events in the course of England's history here). This is the first large-scale war in a long time and thus, one where every details is thrillingly interesting and important. And this is where a first problem comes in: the status of Norfolk. In such a large-scale where every single line of detail in the context that leads to it is important, having Norfolk non canon would mean that after creating the whole war thing in all captivating way with twists and small realistic details we'd have to rewrite it all over again to include Norfolk role in influencing what came after it (even if it's minimal, the butterfly effect). I think Norfolk must be 1) canon 2) complete with its professionaly made and believable different history, culture and place in the region (altough brief because the TBA seems, according to its very small history, to have annexed it very early on). And for that we need to do the same process that was used in the worldbuilding of the other countries in Great Britain: taking the proper time and attention to realism and detail in accordance with the creator of the country's article will and creating as a result a captivating part of the world for readers. Because every single detail, every line of defense can come back later as an advantage or disadvantage in such a war (also the social impact all this would have). I don't think it will be long though (but proper authorizations must be done and it must not create contradictions with other articles, no matter obscure).
Now as for the conflict itself, I think (it's okay) you misunderstood me about the different sides in your template. I'll fix it to show you my vision so see what you think. The OBN is supported by Newolland, Woodbridge and Southern England because of either anti-Windsors misunderstandings that are prevalant in those parts of ex-England or the will of the monarchy of Newolland to support a unification where it could keep its privileges in a legitimized power (where one does not need aristocratic lineage to be a aristocrat, aristocrat that can even be a pretendant to the whole throne under such a system). In other words, to be able to have concessions of power in a England unified under Poll that would fit with their worldview. Matlock is a third side who's kinda obligated to help the pollists versus the biggest threat of the Windsow unionists to their fascist crual rule that doesn't respect human dignity, it's still a third side however. Essex governement is neutral officially because it just want to be its own thing and be left alone outside of the whole unifying process. That doesn't mean there's private individual and under-the-rug military and especially financial support from private individuals there or in the Celtic Union or anywhere else.
Various small raiders groups
Celtic Alliance (officially, unaware of New London's actions)
|Financial support:||Financial support:
And for the flag of such a unified England, southern Scotland and South Africa under King Andrew, I've got two suggestions even if I preffer personally the first one. Wich one do you like better?:
Now, I'll post all of this again for the main talk page so others can judge (even if I think I destroyed their arguments in favor of a popularly approved Edward Poll as king). Regarding you however, sorry to trash the party but you did many unauthorized edits (without asking proper authorization according to the editorial guidelines) that were against the rules. I'd like you to stop that please because this is all a big domino of events and if one is put into review or made canon suddenly, everything stops to make sense and contradictions appear. Every conflict had ask proper canonization and you don't have authority to strip them of it. I'm ready to turn the page however if you actually stop this time.
My apologies concerning the unauthorized edits, I'll confirm every move before acting next time. And between the two designs I prefer the second one. Cheers MrWoodward (talk) 23:24, March 24, 2020 (UTC)
update on the civil war in England
Hello, it's been a long time since any changes were made to the developing story of the civil war in England for 1983: Doomsday. Is this still happening? What's the status of all the ideas and discussions? There have been lots of competing ideas put out there but no coherent final story so far. Benkarnell (talk) 17:24, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello Benkarnell. I haven't been very active on Wikia recently and won't be very much due to university being an absolute pain. Feel free to expand it and talk about it with Sigma and the rest. Next time I come back maybe in a couple of months when I'm a bit more free I'll have a look see how far you get and we can debate it together. Cheers. MrWoodward (talk) 16:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- I don't personally feel competent to make any changes because I haven't written any other things related to Britain or the region. Maybe Sigma can. There are some suggestions on the talk page right now that IMO will help shift your ideas in a realistic direction while keeping the underlying story the same - postwar England struggling with the notion of unity under an authoritarian leader. Benkarnell (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2021 (UTC)