Talk:Tenisi

From IBWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

I would suggest that Tenisi, based on the non-English orthography, was intended to be a Brithenig speaking province. OR, at some time in its past history, it was a majority Brithenig speaking province. We know that Americans *there* are fairly mobile: just look at poor New Sweden! Hardly a Scandinavian speaker in the place anymore! Elemtilas

Contents

NAL Map

The borders of Tenisi and Mobile got changed between the two versions....grrrr... BoArthur

I've been using the latest map. -- Sikulu 16:02, 13 January 2006 (GMT)

Flag

Let me know if you'd like help designing a flag. Zahir 08:12, 13 January 2006 (PST)

What's the story

What do I need to put in (rough outline please)? -- Sikulu 16:16, 13 January 2006 (GMT)

I think it is a matter of answering a series of questions:

  • When was the province settled by Europeans, and by whom?
  • How and when did Tenisi become a province?
  • What is the provincial government like?
  • How did Tenisi figure into the "big events" of NAL history like the end of slavery in the 1830s, the Crisis of 1875, the Great Wars, the Industrial Revolution, etc.?
  • What sort of work do most people do there? What brings in the most money?
  • What kind of "place" is Tenisi? For example, which are the major religions and/or ethnic groups and how do they get along? How important is sports? Which ones? Who do Tenisians like to remind people was from Tenisi?

Again, I'm really looking forward to your answers. Good luck! And don't feel you need every answer all at once. Exploring an imaginary land has its own pleasures, after all. Zahir 08:41, 13 January 2006 (PST)

*here* it was part of New France and was given to England after the seven years war. *There* it would probably have been the same but was then part of the territories seized by NAL during its war with Louisianna and settled by Cambrian farmers. --Marc Pasquin 11:09, 13 January 2006 (PST)
I don't know that Louisianne ever claimed that region....maybe France did....BoArthur 11:29, 13 January 2006 (PST)
I had assumed that Louisianna (in colonial time anyway) would have covered the same lands as it did *here* and that any other changes (gained or loss) were due to later events.--Marc Pasquin 15:19, 13 January 2006 (PST)
I guess, but as far as I knew the US *here* had claim to everything east of the Mississippi since like 1783 or something. Hence why I was thinking that Louisianne had not exercised claims to the area. BoArthur 20:47, 13 January 2006 (PST)
I think the thing to bear in mind is that lacking the 7 years war (1763) any british (or US) land grab would have to be explained differently. In other word, Louisianna would have had about 3 more decades developing any land which *here* were not part of british colonies at the begining of that war. --Marc Pasquin 07:35, 14 January 2006 (PST)
Can I request/suggest a Brithenig name for the province's capital rather than the very non-Brithenig Nashboro? Also, how about Brithenicising Chattanooga as 'Ciatanwga? Deiniol 13:04, 13 January 2006 (PST)
Of course! -- It seems to have been settled by Brithenig speakers, so a Brithenig name would not be out of order. Elemtilas 20:21, 13 January 2006 (PST)
Okay folks, but lets not overwhelm Sikulu with all our preferences. He's taking on this province and Kentucky, so they are his to do with as he sees fit (albeit fitting with QSS). I for one am looking forward to being suprised--as I was by Carolina's hereditary governorship! He might love our suggestions. Or love some of them. Or have better ideas he wants to put forth. Zahir 22:21, 13 January 2006 (PST)
Well said, well said. I'm sure Sikulu, having been around us for some weeks has picked up on the fact that most often we banter between ourselves, but let the creator(s) adjust our suggestions to fit or not as they see fit. BoArthur 22:26, 13 January 2006 (PST)
Of course, he does not have to take Dan's suggestion. But if he's not too familiar with Brithenig, he just might take it! Elemtilas 09:21, 14 January 2006 (PST)

Proposed History

I for one see nothing wrong with the history proposed. I'm a tad curious as to why there was such an urge to have its own identity. Another detail you mightwant to consider is the founding of specific cities. Mostly, I'm looking forward to what you next come up with! Zahir 08:19, 19 January 2006 (PST)

Territorial Existence

I suspect it would've existed for a few years as a League territory, much as Tennessee *here* Nik 01:26, 23 March 2006 (PST)

1763

As I mentioned before, New France disintegrated after the french revolution (1789) --Marc Pasquin 03:24, 23 March 2006 (PST)

Personal tools
discussion