![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This article should really use literary present terminology. 66.56.212.170 22:14, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
Why are we using this terminology? It's just a name invented by one fan on one yahoogroup. Rick K 08:36, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
I was going to ask the same question. I've been reading Turtledove's books for years and this is the first time I've heard the term "Timeline-191". Also, I'd like to see the various short articles on characters and plotlines consolidated into the main article. That said, I like the article as a whole. MK2 04:47, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
I used the term TL-191 because, as far as I know, there isn't any official term for this storyline. Fans used to call it the Great War series, but that's been made obsolete by the American Empire and Settling Accounts trilogies, which take place in the same universe. I realize that using a fanon name isn't a great solution, but I don't see any real options. Some combination of Harry Turtledove and alternate history may make a serviceable title. Or we could just name it the How Few Remain series. Khanartist 20:56, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
While calling all of the books part of "the Great War" series might not be 100% accurate, I feel it's a better solution than making up a new name for the series. MK2 06:22, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
Whatever the series is called, I appreciate that this page was made -- I'm three books behind and haven't seen the third book of the American Empire trilogy anywhere. At least now I know the series has continued. McGehee 04:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
The Feds, the Confederates, the Desereters (Deseretians?) are all American. In such a timeline, it would be likely that Canadians, Québecois, and even Mexicans are recogised as Americans, as they all inhabit the Americas. (I can't remember if it was the Great War series, or elsewhen where Confederates put up the objection that, as citizens of the Confederate States of America, they were also Americans) Should we switch over all references to Americans to US or Federal? samwaltz 11:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Bearing in mind that in the 191 series, American is taken to mean a citizen of the USA, not the CSA, Canada or Mexico. CSA citizens refer to themselves as Americans, but the rest of the world calls them Confederates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghostface26 ( talk • contribs) 04:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
While I like this series and have contributed to this article, I think it's clear we need a major clean-up. First, we need to come up with an overall name that's better than this invented one. Second, we should consolidate all the auxilary articles about fictional characters into a single article rather than a bunch of independant ones. Third, we should clean up the wiki links to real history articles that are talking about their alternative history counterparts. And fourth, we should do a complete overhaul of the article now that it's gotten so long. MK2 03:09, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Can someone tell me why it's expected the series will continue past the '40s and how far past?-- HistoricalPisces 19:26, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
I would personally suggest a list of all major/minor cameos/references to historical figures in the series, as they can be quite hard to keep track of/remember/decipher.
The World War I Map I think contains several errors (albeit relatively minor ones)
-- Menah the Great 14:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
"To the surprise of the U.S. Navy, an assault on Midway Island revealed the Japanese had completely abandoned their garrison there. Many suspected the Japanese were concentrating their resources for an assault on British-held Malaya and Singapore. An amphibious assault on Wake Island some months later regained U.S. control of the island but also found no signs of the Japanese."
I'm confused. I was under the impression that the US, Germany and Austria-Hungary was opposed by the CSA, Britain, France, Russia and Japan - as such, why would the US find Japan building up to conquer Singapore and Hong Kong, considering that they were both British; Britain and Japan are allies, i thought. At least they were the first time around with the Battle of the Three Navies. Can someone more familiar with these series comment, or set the article straight? Thankyou in advance. 220.235.142.170 07:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
They weren't allies, they just followed a similiar warpath. Japan here in our world was allied with Great Britain for WWI, but took over their territories in the Pacific before and during WWII. Konrad13 00:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
"Humiliating terms of surrender were placed on the United States, including the annexation of most of northern Maine to Canada."
It's my belief that the implication was that the British forced upon the Americans (er, well, the Yankees) the acceptance of the original British Claim of the Aroostook region. Obviously, I have no proof to offer, but if this is reasonable, I'd like to see this added to the article. 124.243.160.80 06:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC) (Actually KSHuntley, just haven't logged in)
Is there a collection or box set of some kind that has all the current books?-- HiroProtagonist 05:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Please join the Turtledove discussion at this article. Chris 16:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Can someone please make an interwar map (a map that shows the boundries after the Great War)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Konrad13 ( talk • contribs) 18:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC).
It's remarked in the books that Germany annexed Luxembourg and the rest of Lorraine. Those are clearly defined areas, so they should be on the map. [unknown anon editor]
Are there accurate enough descriptions of the flags to create and upload them? samwaltz 01:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, there are several flags that did, indeed, exist in reality, if not at that time: Imperial Germany, Tsarist Russia, etc.etc. The Freedom Party symbol is described sufficiently-- the Confederate battle flag in reverse-- but it's the two normal American flags that are difficult. How many states do we have in the TL-191 US? How many stars and stripes should there be? And has it ever been mentioned what the stars and bars actually is?-- Hexiva 19:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
"Stars and Bars" is the Confederate (historic) battle flag, as opposed to the "Stars and Stripes," the (historic)flag of the Union.
A difficult distinction, I admit, but an important one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.212.160 ( talk) 12:27, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
I think I may be the only one who feels that the Timeline-191 Wikipedia page is better written than any of the books, save maybe the first one... Everyone did a good job here. Is there any room for criticism of the series or out-of-universe commentary? 65.96.127.134 ( talk) 07:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Did anybody else get the impression that a sort of cold war was brewing between the U.S. and Japan at the very end of the series? It's been a while since I read the books but I thought I remember them talking about Japan trying to get nukes of their own and posing a further threat. I can't find much on this on the Internet but if there's a lot of corroboration then maybe there should be a sentence or two mentioning that in the aftermath of the wars. Not that I think Turtledove has any intention of continuing the series, but it still felt like he was foreshadowing future events in his alternate history. Mbarbier ( talk) 04:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:How Few Remain Front Cover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 16:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
This article is WAY too much plot summary. Needs to be rewritten as an article about the series, not just a lengthy and detail oriented summary of the plot. Savidan 18:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Why? It covers eleven novels, at about the same length and level of detail per novel as several articles on individual novels I've seen. And any article about the series is either going to be the anathema "original research" or a useless collection of reviews available via websearch. Admittedly, plot summary is also available at http://turtledove.wikia.com/wiki/Harry_Turtledove_Wiki. GeorgeTSLC ( talk) 21:43, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
I realize the entire series is based on a decade of publishing ten books, but the summary is too long and detailed. There should be more of an overview, and comparisons to events related to historic figures and actions should be limited to major ones. I question whether that aspect can be adequately covered here without bogging down the article. Detailed coverage should be done in articles on individual books, if anyone is going to tackle that. Parkwells ( talk) 19:08, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This article should really use literary present terminology. 66.56.212.170 22:14, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
Why are we using this terminology? It's just a name invented by one fan on one yahoogroup. Rick K 08:36, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
I was going to ask the same question. I've been reading Turtledove's books for years and this is the first time I've heard the term "Timeline-191". Also, I'd like to see the various short articles on characters and plotlines consolidated into the main article. That said, I like the article as a whole. MK2 04:47, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
I used the term TL-191 because, as far as I know, there isn't any official term for this storyline. Fans used to call it the Great War series, but that's been made obsolete by the American Empire and Settling Accounts trilogies, which take place in the same universe. I realize that using a fanon name isn't a great solution, but I don't see any real options. Some combination of Harry Turtledove and alternate history may make a serviceable title. Or we could just name it the How Few Remain series. Khanartist 20:56, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
While calling all of the books part of "the Great War" series might not be 100% accurate, I feel it's a better solution than making up a new name for the series. MK2 06:22, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
Whatever the series is called, I appreciate that this page was made -- I'm three books behind and haven't seen the third book of the American Empire trilogy anywhere. At least now I know the series has continued. McGehee 04:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
The Feds, the Confederates, the Desereters (Deseretians?) are all American. In such a timeline, it would be likely that Canadians, Québecois, and even Mexicans are recogised as Americans, as they all inhabit the Americas. (I can't remember if it was the Great War series, or elsewhen where Confederates put up the objection that, as citizens of the Confederate States of America, they were also Americans) Should we switch over all references to Americans to US or Federal? samwaltz 11:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Bearing in mind that in the 191 series, American is taken to mean a citizen of the USA, not the CSA, Canada or Mexico. CSA citizens refer to themselves as Americans, but the rest of the world calls them Confederates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghostface26 ( talk • contribs) 04:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
While I like this series and have contributed to this article, I think it's clear we need a major clean-up. First, we need to come up with an overall name that's better than this invented one. Second, we should consolidate all the auxilary articles about fictional characters into a single article rather than a bunch of independant ones. Third, we should clean up the wiki links to real history articles that are talking about their alternative history counterparts. And fourth, we should do a complete overhaul of the article now that it's gotten so long. MK2 03:09, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Can someone tell me why it's expected the series will continue past the '40s and how far past?-- HistoricalPisces 19:26, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
I would personally suggest a list of all major/minor cameos/references to historical figures in the series, as they can be quite hard to keep track of/remember/decipher.
The World War I Map I think contains several errors (albeit relatively minor ones)
-- Menah the Great 14:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
"To the surprise of the U.S. Navy, an assault on Midway Island revealed the Japanese had completely abandoned their garrison there. Many suspected the Japanese were concentrating their resources for an assault on British-held Malaya and Singapore. An amphibious assault on Wake Island some months later regained U.S. control of the island but also found no signs of the Japanese."
I'm confused. I was under the impression that the US, Germany and Austria-Hungary was opposed by the CSA, Britain, France, Russia and Japan - as such, why would the US find Japan building up to conquer Singapore and Hong Kong, considering that they were both British; Britain and Japan are allies, i thought. At least they were the first time around with the Battle of the Three Navies. Can someone more familiar with these series comment, or set the article straight? Thankyou in advance. 220.235.142.170 07:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
They weren't allies, they just followed a similiar warpath. Japan here in our world was allied with Great Britain for WWI, but took over their territories in the Pacific before and during WWII. Konrad13 00:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
"Humiliating terms of surrender were placed on the United States, including the annexation of most of northern Maine to Canada."
It's my belief that the implication was that the British forced upon the Americans (er, well, the Yankees) the acceptance of the original British Claim of the Aroostook region. Obviously, I have no proof to offer, but if this is reasonable, I'd like to see this added to the article. 124.243.160.80 06:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC) (Actually KSHuntley, just haven't logged in)
Is there a collection or box set of some kind that has all the current books?-- HiroProtagonist 05:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Please join the Turtledove discussion at this article. Chris 16:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Can someone please make an interwar map (a map that shows the boundries after the Great War)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Konrad13 ( talk • contribs) 18:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC).
It's remarked in the books that Germany annexed Luxembourg and the rest of Lorraine. Those are clearly defined areas, so they should be on the map. [unknown anon editor]
Are there accurate enough descriptions of the flags to create and upload them? samwaltz 01:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, there are several flags that did, indeed, exist in reality, if not at that time: Imperial Germany, Tsarist Russia, etc.etc. The Freedom Party symbol is described sufficiently-- the Confederate battle flag in reverse-- but it's the two normal American flags that are difficult. How many states do we have in the TL-191 US? How many stars and stripes should there be? And has it ever been mentioned what the stars and bars actually is?-- Hexiva 19:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
"Stars and Bars" is the Confederate (historic) battle flag, as opposed to the "Stars and Stripes," the (historic)flag of the Union.
A difficult distinction, I admit, but an important one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.212.160 ( talk) 12:27, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
I think I may be the only one who feels that the Timeline-191 Wikipedia page is better written than any of the books, save maybe the first one... Everyone did a good job here. Is there any room for criticism of the series or out-of-universe commentary? 65.96.127.134 ( talk) 07:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Did anybody else get the impression that a sort of cold war was brewing between the U.S. and Japan at the very end of the series? It's been a while since I read the books but I thought I remember them talking about Japan trying to get nukes of their own and posing a further threat. I can't find much on this on the Internet but if there's a lot of corroboration then maybe there should be a sentence or two mentioning that in the aftermath of the wars. Not that I think Turtledove has any intention of continuing the series, but it still felt like he was foreshadowing future events in his alternate history. Mbarbier ( talk) 04:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:How Few Remain Front Cover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 16:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
This article is WAY too much plot summary. Needs to be rewritten as an article about the series, not just a lengthy and detail oriented summary of the plot. Savidan 18:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Why? It covers eleven novels, at about the same length and level of detail per novel as several articles on individual novels I've seen. And any article about the series is either going to be the anathema "original research" or a useless collection of reviews available via websearch. Admittedly, plot summary is also available at http://turtledove.wikia.com/wiki/Harry_Turtledove_Wiki. GeorgeTSLC ( talk) 21:43, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
I realize the entire series is based on a decade of publishing ten books, but the summary is too long and detailed. There should be more of an overview, and comparisons to events related to historic figures and actions should be limited to major ones. I question whether that aspect can be adequately covered here without bogging down the article. Detailed coverage should be done in articles on individual books, if anyone is going to tackle that. Parkwells ( talk) 19:08, 7 November 2013 (UTC)